SAND77-0274

Unlimited Release
%£j
i?Hcay~o ay TIC ;
." i 0 irr;

r W!PP Conceptual Design Report

AtkWndum F: HVAC Syttans Enaroy Anatysii for Wet* dotation ^
^U Pilot Plant (WIPP) Conceptual Dstign Raport,
By Holmtt & Narvar, Inc., Anahaim, California,
April 1B77

. H S . B B W ' * * !'![-
 ADDENDUM F
HVAC Systems Energy Analysis
For a

WASTE rSOLATION PILOT PLANT

April 1977

Submitted To

FENK&SCISSON.INC.

TULSA, OKLAHOMA

HOMES &NAItt^R, INC.

ENQsNEERS -CONS rRUCJORS

A Resourcj Saerca c

II MES A NARVn

UlSTSiaBTIBN 9F THIS EJOCUSEHT IS UHUMitSS

1. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
2. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
3. DEVELOPMENT OF DATA
l>. HVAC SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES
5. LIFE-CYCLE COSTS
6. CONCLUSIONS

APPENDIXES*
A. CENTRAL HEATING/REFRIGERATION VERSUS
INDIVIDUAL HEAT PUMPS
B. LIFCY1 COMPUTER RUNS
C. TRACE COMPUTER RUNS

*Appendlx C is printed separately and ts not

normally distributed with this addendum.
The Information in this Appendix, which
is approximately 600 pages of computer
printout, is summarized in the HVAC energy
study. Interested persons should consider
this fact before requesting a copy of
this lengthy Appendix.
1. SUMMAHY AND RECOMMENDATIONS -

1.1 SUMMARY

This report presents the r e m i t s of a technical and economic analysis

of alternative methods of meeting the heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning,
requirements of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facilities proposed to
be constructed in southeastern New Mexico.
This report analyzes a total of ten WIPP s t r u c t u r e s to determine the
most energy and economic efficient means of providing heating, ventilating,
and air-conditioning s e r v i c e s . Additional analysis was performed to determine
the m e r i t s of centralized versus dispersed refrigeration and heating facilities,
and of performing supplemental domestic hot water heating with Solar panels.
1-1 VAC systems for several of the major WIPP s t r u c t u r e s , representing
in excess of 85 percent of the site UVAC energy demand, were examined in
detail utilising the Tj-ane Company "TRACE" computer program. The huildings
analyzed were the Administration, Ult Waste, TRU Waste and Man/Material
structures. Each was analyzed for several alternative HVAC systems dependent
upon the p r i m a r y functional requirements of the HVAC system for the particular
building-. Waste handling building systems utilize once-through ventilation while
the Adminstration facility i s an office-type facility using m o r e conventional type
air-conditionin& In addition to the basic HVAC systems, several energy con­
servation techniques such as heat recovery for one-through s y s t e m s , solar
a s s i s t , and supplcnicnt.nl evaporative cooling were considered. The accept­
ability of these energy conservation additions was a s s e s s e d by the determination
of lifo-cyelo costs using the I J I F C Y I computer p r o g r a m .
The systems found to be most energy effective for the WIFF Facility
were:
Administration: Medium p r e s s u r e variable a i r volume system with
internal heat recovery, utilizing supplemental evaporative cooling and a solar
assisti'd, electrically driven heat pump.
 RjnVaste: Oner thrim»h wiitSl.il Lon sy:iU-in with boat rro>vrry from exhnust
air flow, utili/.itif! supplemental evaporative cooling and solar assisted
electrically d r i w n !te.*i pump for the uir-comUtianiiig.

TUlMV'iiste: Once Ihrmigh ventilation system with beat r^covi-ry from exhaust
a i r flow, uiUi?.i:i^ supplemental evaporative, cooling and solar assisted
eleeti-ienlly driven hc.it pump for the air-conditioning.

Man/Material.-:; A tmiKi-jtoiir system using evaporative cooling and heat

recovery. Hoi water heating for this facility will he supplemented by solar
liratiii)i units.

The TKAOiC siiwl l.TFCVl program results were then taken into account in
J
the evaluation of Ihe remaining \VI1 I' buildings lo determine tha HVAC systems
to be recommended for USJC. Tlic systems recommended for these building;: a r c
ae fuliovs:

•Site l-'ntrnncr O-ih? llnnsc - an elcrtrically driven heat pump will provide
be.'si'iif; ami eooling.

WareluniH^v^BKt'ns - a mull i-/.emu system using evaporative cooling will

serve (he office . i v . i . A once through system with evaporative cooling and i.pol
heating will serve the shop a r e a .

Vchieb- M.-Iiileinncf: - spot heating will he provided in the maintenance

area. The office and toilet area will he ventilated with cooling by an evaporative
cooler and heat inn by rcsitHnnri: healing elements.

^ii,ifStPI-'i-.*-_Y'_J'sto/1-:111Tidlry - a once-through I'-y&tvm will utilize v.oned

p r e s s u r e control and III-.;*-'A cxhaas! filters. Evaporative cooling, resistance
beating and heat recovery will lie ujscd in the system.
KlI^TKl' H'dr.t j_hnisc - a uii'-e-throvigb system with evaporative cooling
and resistance bunting j J I be mi listed.
w

2
- BACKCHOt.'Xn AMI Pt'RPO?iK Ol-' UKl'ORT

, In recent years attention has heen focused on energy as an exhaustible

resource.. The growing realisation that energy supplies a r e dwindling and
the prcKfiuro of an expanding energy demand has resulted in a conscious
effort to curtail inefficient energy use. In keeping with the need to make,
the* best passible use of cm*rgy r e s o u r c e s , it baa become increasingly
desirable to a s s u r e efficient methods of heating, cooling, and ventilating
buildings. This r e p o r t presents the r e Bulls of analysis directed at assuring
an energy efficient design basis fur the W1PP Facility HVAC s y s t e m s .
Basic activities of the HVAC energy analysis wer* as follows:
1, Gather data on building HVAC requirements, including allowable
t e m p e r a t u r e s and building configurations,
2, Determine building ventilation requirements and resulting
concepts.
3, Analyze the HVAC concepts to Oct ermine technical -»nd economic
acceptability.
4, Report the resulting conclusions and recommendations.

3. DEVELOPMENT OF DATA
Data and material utilized in the performance of the HVAC energy
study was gathered over the period from the project initiation in June, 3976
to the com pi elt on of the analysis in April, 1977. During this period
numerous meetings svexe held with representatives of Sandia l a b o r a t o r i e s ,
Fenix & Scisson, Inc., and Holmes & Narver, Inc., in attendance. As
design of the W1PP evolved, the philosophy of the HVAC requirements
evolved in a parallel p r o c e s s . The evolution reunited in the development
of facility designs requiring analysis of the economic and energy
utilization alternatives. The following methods were utilized in the
analysis:

The basic mechanical HVAC systems concept was based on

conformance with General Design Criteria for Inferior Mechanical Systems,
P a r t 1, Section D, ERDA Appendix 6301; ASHRAE Standard 90-75, and NRC
Guides.
The heat load calculations were performed in accordance with the
ASHHAE Handbook of Fundamentals.
 - Life cycle studies were performed in accordance with ERDAM
6301 Interim Life-Cycle Costing Guidelines.
:
- Total Annual energy uscages were determined by use of 'TRACE"
computer programs for major facility s t r u c t u r e s .
- Relative energy conservation and payoff times of various
alternative systems were determined by use of Sandia Laboratory
LIFCVL computer p r o g r a m s .

4. HVAC SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES ANALYSED

A total or 6 "TRACE" computer runs were made in the examination
of the HVAC systems for the four major WIPP s t r u c t u r e s . In addition, a
number of L1FCYL runs were performed to determine the life cycle costs
of various alternative systems being considered for WIPP. Data from the
"TRACE" and L1FCYL runs was then utilized in making decisions on HVAC
system configurations for buildings which were not analysed with the "TRACE
program. Table 4-1 presents a summary of the alternatives considered in
the "TRACE" computer analysis. Copies of the "TRACE" computer runs
a r e incorporated as an appendix to this report. As a result of the "TRACE"
runs, the following systems were selected as the most favored for the four
major WIPP buildings.

Administration Facility; Medium p r e s s u r e variable air volume

system utilizing reciprocating heat pump with heat recovery, supplemental
evaporative cooling, and supplemental solar panels.

RH Waste Facility: 100% outside air, heat recovery with a centrifugal

hfaL pump, supplemental evaporative cooling, and supplemental solar
panels.
u
TRU Waste Facility: 100 /o outside a i r , heat recovery with a centrifugal
heat '.mp. supplemental evaporative cooling, and supplemental solar
panels.

Man/Materials Building: Packaged roof top multizunc unit using 100%

out>ide air with boat recovery, resistance heating, supplemental evaporative
cooling, and supplemental solar panels.
 TABLE 4-1
SUMMARY OF WTPP HVAC ALTERNATIVES

tUlLDiNB AITEBNAT£1 AtTEHSATE 2 ALTERNATES ALTERNATE 4

/iDMSNISTRATION C M Hi tug Jl hen pump 2st*g*itnorpiH>n — 2 stage absorption - Centrifugal hut

RUHl Double duct diittict iteant dittfict itearrt pump
variable atrvahim* Variable air
volume

ADMINISTRATION Dirlrtct chilled mw Oiitrict chilled water Riciproutini chiller/ Reciprocating cjiMltr/
BUN 2 District neini OittrktHHm hut pump hut pump
Doubli duct Variable m varum a Variable cir volume Doubli duct

A0MW1STRATION Sytiim 1 - »t'abSt air tulgRit -
RUN 3 rental - runt 2* tin/day — na>
cafeteria
Svnttn 2 - w i i b l l a*r nJuma -
rtfctet - night tNtdoMt
eiffifihi9»»shiSfcr~-iS5»F
condinnr water
Syttiail-~ variable air vaiufM- Semt*«alit«iat*tBMt StmittimmtZtm*
rtheal - ram V, hn/dty - n§ u a i reciprocating uttt f cciproutini
cafeteria cftMtr chafer
Syrian 2 - variable tit votuMt -
tthtn - m#n ifes&awa
Eisnilupi chiller 185°F
candenter wiitr. ChiUtr AuUoim
bttaw 77»F D.B. for evap. CHlinf

HH Ctntrifueal hut pump Cintilfupl h u t pump * StHKMliWlMlilkwt

Oiflrict steam Datticl steam u m cantrifuejal umCrMrifiajet
HutncovKy BtttfKOWfy rtfriftmtt* Tatrloaratian
tOOKtHii^dttir 108K o*t»fc ttr
Heat pump shutdown bctt«77*F
OX. It# enp. cwlwj

TSU Can*rilusai reff^nian Ceattilujal Mttpawp Ctatrifyoaifeatlpttn*

Ditttlctittammw OttirlctitiHnhiat • t a i n tiee** beat DiMikt ttcam I M M
1WX outride etr lOOKouEMtaif HMtnemry Hate. eecO'verY
INKMBtdtaA- IIKwtMdakir
Ctnkif»l*l>MMPkW|i
•HWtw77«Fhr

MAN/MATERIALS l*i;kaged roof tap mnitiim; r W u f t d roof top rmltiiMMr: Serceaaaftanwttl, Same « eMerneM 2
m H I w t t hnting; 100% outside w rtsHtanct htiting: 100% t>Mi$ o w n rtJrifwitiwi except retrieafetie*
Na heat recovery. Ho rtrriftranon •ir. Hett rrcmry. No rrtripnrtion bttowT^FDJ-ii D
betw»77 F D J . i l
Wow 77°f O.B. for rap. ceding W w ??°F O.B.fer tvap.ca«li«f CWllRWd « ! IK MtM «ntinut< « * » « • «
tea clanta room an i Erunas worn

Noti: 'dtnottlfyttmselKtH,
 Following selection of the basic systems, the. addition of
supplemental energy conservation techniqueH was considered. The con­
servation technique!; considered w e r e :
Heat pipes *: liquid transfer heat recovery
Solar a.ssisl for .space heating
Kvnporative cooling
Solar assist for lint water healing

The relative merit of the supplemental systems was determined

on the basis of cost effectiveness ns determined by L1FOYJ.. computer prngrni
anal) sis. .S'pccifii :. <>i" (he JjJf'CYIj analysis are reported in Section 5 of (Ills
report.
On the basis of.the analysis leading to the proceeding conclusions,
11VAC sy.4l.-ius have been selected for the remainder of the WIPP facilities.
The remninim-. buildings a r e not of the type nor do they have the use and
occupancy factors which will require: complete air conditioning and healing,
and then-lore did in.l require as complete an analysis its the major structures
referenced above. I,i:;led below are flic WIPP facilities and the 11VAC
systems recommended for each.
G£ilt:_l_loiir>_e_ - Nn specifir analysis has been performed for thin
structure. Heating and cooling will be provided by tin rter.lrir boat pump
unit. As noted in the architectural description for the building, insulation
will he provided to meet required "U" values.
Mine 1-'iIl.yj*_j\\ii Idmg - Air passing through this building will be at
a relatively constant temperature. Due to its heavy concrete walls, the
interior of the building will remain ;it a relatively constant temperature
throughout the yearly period. Wine ventilation fans will be connected In
the vital power supply system assuring continued airflow through the
building. No infernal heating or cooling is anticipated, therefore, no
energy analysis was performed.
' Vehicle Maintenance Facility - Electric resistance spot heating
will be provided for this building a s required for personnel and freeze
protection. The building will be open to the outside and air conditioning
is nut recommended. Evaporative cooling will be ulili/.ed for the small
office anil I'cslL-oomarcii.
Suspect Waste/Laundry Building - Due to I he presence of radio­
active Liquids and the possibility of radioactive vapors in this building, a
nncn (hroii^li ventilation system without reheat will be utilised. Evaporative
cooling and inily minor resitUjuice. heating will provide sufficient healing
and cooling for the building. No specific energy analysis has been per­
formed for this building. Laundry activities will provide an internal
source of heat for the building, Laundry operations will occur during
the daytime, not at night, and spot radiant heaters will be provided for
fruesitf protection. Solar hoi water heating will be utilized for meeting
laundry requirements.
Hoist Houses - The IU1 and TKU hoist house rooms will be
connected via cable tunnels to their respective waste handling buildmtr.
Ventilation air enter hip, each room wilj pass through the motor and
control area to remove heat generated during hoisting operations and
a portion will be exhausted. The remainder of the air will be drawn
through the cable tunnels and into (lie WVIKIO handling buildings, assuring
positive control of radioactive contamination should it be carried on ihe
cable. Huist operator control rooms in both buildings will be heated and
cooled by small self-contained units,

The Mar/IvlaLerJ;i] s lioisL house will be heated as required by spot healing

with no cooling being provided, 'the operator control room wi]l be heated
and cooled by small, self-contained heat pump units.
Emergency Generator lluilding - This structure is designed to
r e s i s t tornado missiles and therefore it has heavy concrete walls providing
good insulating qualities. The building has a low population factor; local
heating will provide, personnel comfort when the building is occupied.
Ventilation will be required for standby generator heat removal when the
generators a r e in operation and will be provided as an integral part of the
building; design. This building did not justify a complete and comprehensive
energy nn.ilyyiii,

\\'n'•chtnisr/Sl»insi - The warehouse building contains storage

space, office s p a r e , and shop a r e a s . Cooling will not be provided for
Ibe storage n v w . Spot heating will be provider! for freeze protection.
The shops will he provided with a once through ventilation system to
a s s u r e acceptable a i r quality. Evaporative cooling will bo utilized when
required, fipol heating will provide heat on an "as required" b a s i s ,
Efilimjtod healing and cooling leads for tlie WIPP service buildings a r e
summarised in Table 4-2. These loads were prepared by Holmes & Narvcr,
Inc. for use in the Alternative Kncrgy Sources analysis performed by
KnvH'ndyj.-e Kncrgy Services. Th^y a r e indicative of the building 'oads
which should he nnliripaled and provide a source for comparison of their
magnitude relative In.the kinds established for the major V.TPP buildings.
5• i.irK c.vci.i' cos'rs
As rnuiiiionod in prior scelions,lho LIFCY1 program was utilized
to ilftetmiitr (he relative merits of alternate IIVAC s y s t e m s . Copies of
the input and milpul for Ihc runs performed a r e included in the Appendix
of (his report. Table 5-1 sutmnaricxes the results of I he runs and presents
conclusion.*; bnrsed on thtir.c reauHs. F o r the purposes of life cycle cost
analysis, Ihf district steam healing loads computed in the TllACE runs were
converted to cicatrical power demand.
'.»

TABLE 4-2

ESTIMATED WIPP SERVICE BUILDING HVAC LOADS

I
1 DESIGN LOAD j ANNUAL LOADS
t
J BUILDING PEAK
HEATING EVAPORATIVE 1
! HEATING COOLING
DTC/im COOLING HP-KW KWHRS KWiHtS

Warehouse/Shops 519,000 17 IIP 89,000 2,100

Vehicle Maintenance F a c i l i t y 80,400 15 IIP 43,300 432

E m e r g e n c y P o w e r Building 90,000 15 IIP 49,400 1,296

Hoist Houses 34,100 3 HP 40 29

Suspect W a a t o / L a u n d r y Building 144,000 15 IIP 24,700 432

Site E n t r y Gatehouse 30,000 3 HP 15,400 31,000

 TABI.1-: 5-1

SUMMARY OF l.ll'CYl ANALYSIS RESULTS

ISuililiiis System Payback Savin}: i./3iivi.tf!n

Period, Years Ratio

Rll - 1 Heat iU'cuvery 7.2 3.061

RU - 2 F.vapui-alivp Cuulinft 3. 5 5.955

RH - 3 Solar Assist IB.3 1.321

TRU - 1 1U-.11. Recovery 8.2 2.758

•nn> - 2 Evaporative Cooling 3.5 5. 975

TRU - 3 Solar Assist 18.5 1. 30B

A<lmjms:rati'.:i Kvaporativi- Cooling 3.3 6. 27';

Aoniinislrutini. Snl.-tr Assist 15.5 I . 531

Laundry Solar Assist 12.3 1.901.

tor Hot Water

/v
 o, CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions have been described lu the development of HIP body
of the. report and a r c summarized h e r e :

A, A Central Healing and Refrigeration plant is uneconomic for the

WIl'P facility when compared lu individual H/Kterns located in the buildings
they s e r v e .
1*. Kvaporalive conline. is an economic supplement to heal
pump refrigeration s y s t e m s . In addition, evaporative cooling is ;*n
economic means of providing cooling for minor buildings at a facility with
a design interior temperature of R2° F .
C. Soliir a s s i s t for space and hot water heating is economic for
the WIPP facility.
15. Heat pipes and liquid transfer heat r e c o v e r y a r e an economic
supplement for once through ventilation s y s t e m s .
V', For conventional air conditioning systems, a variable air
voluim system is the favored alternate.

JS"
 APPKNDIX A

AN ANALYSIS OF

CENTHAL HEATINO/REFRIGERATION

VEKSUS

INDIVIDUAL HEAT PUMPS

/b
 SUMMARY

In accordance with WIPP project c r i t e r i a HfcN has evaluated the

use of'individual heat pumps v e r i u a a central at earn /chilled water plant
for the W I P P facility buildings requiring refrigeration. Thia evaluation
shows that individual heat pumps a r e the moat desirable from both
ennruy and economic viewpoints.

17
DISCUSSION

Three at the WIPP buildings will require refrigeration and

heating which could be supplied from cither a central huaiiutw county
plant or irum individual heat pump*. These a r e the TRU, RH and
Administration buildings. Three alternate systems, listed below, have
been considered fur supplying the heating and cooling requirements Tor
ifu-K<* buildings.

Alternate 1 - Central Refrigeration plus Steam Boilers wiLh

chilled wrticr and steam pipioy la buildings (RH - TR.U- Administration}.

Alternate 2 - Individual Heat Pumps and cooling lowers in each

building UUI . TRU - Ad mini B I ration).

Alternate 3 - Individual Heat Pumps with a central cooling

lower and condenser water piping to the building.* (RH - TRU - Admin­
istration).

The attached cost estimate shows the relative initial costs of the
e
three allcrnnle. . The costs overwhelmingly fa vor Hie use of Alternate Z -
individual heat pumps and cooling towers at each building. The operating
costs, including energy, will also favor the use of individual s y s t e m s .
Alternate 1 will have high thermal losses in the piping network and will
require the operation and maintenance of a large central system whenever
any <ui the buildings require services, Alternate 1 is also l e s s energy
efficient because the central system cannot be operated as a heat pump.
Comparison of the energy consumption of a central system (Alternate J)
versus individual systems (Alternate 2) shows the advantages of individ­
ual system* on an annual energy consumption b a s i s .

Individual Systems 3, 810, 000 KWH/YR

Central Plant 4,190,000 KWH/YR + 11,148 Therms
CONCUTSrON

On the basis oC initial economics and estimated energy con­

sumption, il i s recommended that individual heat pumps be utilized to
provide heating and cooling for the RH, TRU and Administration
buildings.
r _.- ... SUMM.^ i^i-sn:; **•(

.^i-'-'i-j-.^K.}..
\air£is/Mr£- / i.*6B 131380\ m£cx>\ jsoevo. ut-otik

... i
\JtiifcXAir/*/g' 2, 700 i . xseo .*? .a»: &£te\ sMiaal

yurtdtAfAr^-s *JZ* I Ltff J » J20.JJA 3t£U>\ \ fUJttA

/Sa.saa-.BfU/P./JD/fijB/AZLC'TS 1

.'..._'___.! 'i'-fi 1—_ J l_

Jt*££Z£-*£QLarser* *><£&Z . S>4. <ZAL7*. . LCC»!iSI
l«[l _ ! . F COST
; W / ;„ y BID ITEM 10.
L!.?i-°LIiI™i r*r.<>rcrey •«» M.3x.r/./n
 -•< ! wirie;
^- 7 1 ! . 1 >7 . » 1 " : :H . ; '

rrV:;.
t l
10711 i
y- l ilcSiH.PTiB*' ' ,
""" "'•" '\-;P : e-:':;'! «-•'•«- wow as: j
_ i
—. .. ._|
... . | ^ * o . ' ! O0aLC4&70tr&- J j J. :.-*r,. .: .. _ ,/7<SW>
j./«e . . . 1.... fans 1
£aaaf/#eaa/tSK-.. . . .. _._JJ.|.L. .... U0O ' .
f i w Ytm&jer 1 J. t r I *£i . . . . *flafl — ~-
j - • .. .... ._
.J&/&4<!#e /&B
._ t.&r+0

.J —-
: : ; - _ • _ - •f-
_jai|iw>
£-4L-..:.±
itjL. :• -V a-se.
,UX>
i 3 7 .•ar»o]
\*h C M
TJLCficir f &ta */:>(.{.
1
™

-Zioo- ay /«£ £ .
^• ' — fjf oaa
oarjam.£Tf /so ;_— ?f
-£j,£CTMiesn. —*Jr- — - _ .5S» in*£
= r
r£.fTj.rv/ Jt- safi.
|
4MS tf film fa? (*>L ^ 7/f &MU
I 1
Firiiuv yf+sTif /fitJ*<*r/r&J 0/*arfittftfr?

TYPE OF E S T I l . A T £ a < , r j . 7 1 s ,y>. JOB no. SZSI./O KEET H . ? OF y PRINCIPAL SUB ACCT. HO. y ^ f ^
 -
- ' •'" T — — — • • - M , _ — — -

:
C t T t 1 i £ S T I !» A T E i « * i " 4
.:„.» j *^ 1 i 1

Kt*. TO H I
i:s:«'-!"vn« : COST

; !

i
r"; j u a * * / a r / u w « < r . . . L . JL'JV \

.... p..
i / ^ ...

.__
,87e&> —
n*^*«
i • i • •
_.

_.
;
./Ze
IEE j.
•
T
J. \
:
- - • " •

_.'I- <Mivtucji«e7u. - 1
4. „ _ . ,1 ftp
# > j » Punrf . . -# 9PP
. - ./
•r-t- L 1
zfA^_ */ *£
SSraAJBUIUt£XfSMA2-_ ... . . a. Jea «>lo<a>
_ • . : cauiMi-omex „. .A. „ . . 4\it3

iif y^ixA^.

xetrjEiwri
. *

_*£"
'ML

~/etL
i j
.....
jji^aa

•
;
(U>ji<uke:z&-.--„ .. Jfcr. _±ta ... - ^l^tt?
1
1"
:- -2f£ vT j/7 f** - /? fi**1
^ _. _ '.l.~. i ..._j... —
w
\ ! 1
Mr;!.: r> wMJ'7*- / ffl *•" r/<P*S P/£6 7 S=v;^- c '

1 V F OF E8TIMT6a*V W f m «r • . A M / / p Srtj • m 3 if 4 "K.N.-iPa; 113 ttCT. HO.

^ArfZ"
 ...... ,.._ ' > i .

1
H ^.
•: s i • s •

0ESU!«-!.'>
;
• :-:'•!•

.
it.

h
'.»:.' t

, : ... M:-'
••>•••••• * 'T
.sr •}•:.

;.•':>:

:. •
,4 f**r i —

jti.rsas.'-.'-r-re'JZ. .... .
~l7.4tO
SaH'.AielPi \ _ 3.'. Y '. '.'• a ; ' \ - • '.:''#i*i.T".
i...-.
Jey.ftiejeeiaiifzrr j J . 7 i 4 . . t f . . Jttan-.
• \ • • •

TtULMLAC i... . :._. .

uWL/ittJi ...
- . \ 3Z,. 1
-*St*l> A/HAS- 1 •?!•!- ..IA.
MBt?;£tajf<H><ze-K i J\j- i
JSH rjjr Anxr jo****— -.. - - i '^IAJ i "h s
.&M*-Al*t*-~
- ~ •r ii •
i /ifte)
— jieifJ&KUHHjtsex .. ..-JIV.-. ... I.tr -t" :- 1—.—Jte
Ataa

'it \at JSO.

,
/4M* MW*.- ...x\\. .i-id». -
— J4> i .VD
/{•'•
— i
(tDMSZem- _ . ju XaJf. _.. • Zfeo
x
T£Sff &aut—..- .. -• .- \~\w\r . : .....
1 :;:£: ... 1
1
\
.. .. i , !
i_
•- '
. .. ] .. -Z J T jy.-TAO ffi\*0&
! 1 1 • ! • • ! ••

.•tru-'i r .
ivi't or
1 ='* '••ii CiPii EUa i = » At/rMZ-
 APPENDIX B

UFCY 1 COMPUTER RUNS

*?
 1ISJ LIFE-CYCLE CDST COMPARISONS » S I

••INCUT DHTR»»
LDCRTIDNI UIPP
-01-77 DESIGNER! M. KLRTSKIN
COST DF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USEDF PER MILLION BUI - $7.9990
COST DF STEAM* GAS DR OTHER ENKR6Y USED. PER MBTU - ». 0000
YEARLY ESCALATION RRTE FOR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 %
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FDR STEAM. GAS OR DIL IS .0 %
YEARLY DISCOUNT RATE IS S. 0 Ss
NUMBER DF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ARE £ ALTERNATES
•••RESULTS DF ECONOMIC STUDY^w

ALTERNATE ND. 1 DATA (CENT HEAT PUMP)

INSTALLATION FIRST COST S375. 000. 00
ANNUAL D & M CDST (LESS ENERGY) SIS.000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 4903 MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AND/OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE £5 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY CDST IS 39219.1 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 1£0399. DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 1.283£3E*6 DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. £ DATA (CENT HEAT PUMP (W--HEAT RECOVERY)}

INSTALLATION FIRST CDST . . .7: M£J» UUITTOO
ANNUAL 0 £. M CDST (LESS ENERGY).... $17,000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 376£ MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AND'DR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE £5 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY CDST IS 3009£.£ DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 110730. DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 1.18£0£E+6 DOLLARS

• ••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK PERIODS^^

TD GD FROM ALTERNATE 1» TO ALTERNATE~~gVEAYBACK IS 7.P YEARS*^
1
FINAL (YEAR 3) YEARS ENERGY SAVINGS'OJS I li L^tHE-H HOLLARS
1JITH 1.141 MILLIONS DF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SAVIN6S.-INVESTMENT RATIO IS 3.064
ENERGY SAVINGS IS S7O.500 BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST CDST ALTERNATE
 77<*04^01. 1 0 . 4 1 . 3 2 .
PROGRAM LIFCY1

t $ S J LIFE-CYCLE COST COMPARISONS JS«

••INPUT DATA^

BLDtTsf RH LOCATION: WIPP

PRDJ. : 4-01-77 DESIGNER: II. KLATSKIN
CDST DF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED. PER MILLION BTU = S7.9990
CDST DF STEAM. GAS OR UTHER ENERGY USED. PER MBTU = S.0000
YEARLY ESCALATION ROTE FOR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 %
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR STEAM. GAS OR Oil IS .0 *
YEARLY DISCOUNT RATE IS 3.0 V.
NUMBER DF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ARE 2 ALTERNATES
• ••RESULTS IF ECONOMIC STUDY^«

ALTERNATE ND. 1 DATA CCENT HEAT PUNP W/HEAT RECOVERY)

INSTALLATION FIRST CDST $425,000.0(1
ANNUAL 0 & H COST (LESS ENERGY) $17,000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 3762 MILLIDN BTO
STEAM. GAS AND'OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY CDST IS 30092.2 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED CDST IS UC730. DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 1.13202E+6 DOLLARS

ALTERNATE ND. 2 DATA (CENT HEAT PUMP UXHERT RECOV tEVAP COOL) "
INSTALLATION FIRST COST $449.00o7T
ANNUAL 0 «, M COST (LESS ENERGY) 118.000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 2758 MILLIDN BTU
STEAM. GAS AND/OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 22061.2 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED CDST IS 99539.1 DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 1.06309E*6 DOLLARS

• ••DISCOUNTED PAYBACKPERIJJIiat
TD GO FROM ALTERNATE 1» TO ALTERNATE ^PAYBACK IS 3.• S YEARS _ 3
FINAL (YEAR 4) YEARS ENERGY SAVINGsTLUSI U i. W iSESTTJoirfiRs
t
WITH 1.004 MILLIONS DF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SAVIN6S.-INVESTMEHT RATIO IS 5.955
ENERGY SAVINGS IS 1.045.333 BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOyEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST COST ALTERNATE
 77^04/06. 09.33.2".
PROGRAM LIFCYI

S M S LIFE-CYCLE COST COHPARISONS SSSS

••INPUT DATfi^
BLJUi^RH-s} LOCATION: HIPP
P/Bjr-MiW^NO.: 4-6-77 DESIGNER: H-H
COST OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED. PER MILLION ETU = S7.9990
COST OF STEAM. GAS DR OTHER ENERGY USED. PER MDTU • S.0000
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 %
YEAPLY ESCALATION RATE FDR STEAM. GAS DR OIL IS .OK
YEARLY DISCOUNT RATE IS 8.0 *
NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ARE £ ALTERNATES
•••RESULTS Of ECONOMIC STUDY^*»

ALTERNATE NO. I OATA (BASE SYSTEM)

INSTALLATION FIRST COST $449. 000, 00
ANNUM. 0 8, M CDST (LESS ENERSY) S18.000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED - £753 MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS ANO'OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY CDST IS ££061.8 DDLLFlRS
TOTRL ANNUALIZED CDST IS 99589.1 DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT IJORTH IS 1.06309E+6 DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. £ DATA (BASE WIT/SOLAR ASSIST)}

INSTALLATION FIRST COST....\ 1 1^1.400.00
ANNUAL 0 S, 11 COST (LESS ENERGY) S££,000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 14££ MILLION ETU
STEAM. GAS AND'OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE £5 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY CDST IS 11374.6 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED ~~ T IS 95908. DOLLARS
TOTAL PPESENT WORTH IS 1.02380E*6 DOLLARS

•••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK PERIODS^"

TO 60 FROM ALTERNATE 1» TO ALTERNATE ITpAYBACK
flNAL (YEAR 19) YEARS ENERGY SAVINGS'
yiTH 1.236 MILLIONS OF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SAVINGS^INVESTMENT RATIO IS 1.321
ENERGY SAVINGS IS 2?£.875 BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST CDST ALTERNATE
 77/04.-01. 10.37.05.
PRDGRBN LIFCY1

0403O OATH "RH ssl"

04040 DATA "WIPP"
04050 DATA "4-01-77"
04060 DBTB - M . KLBTSKIN"
04070 DATA 7.999
04090 DHTA 0
04090 OATH 5.7
04100 DATA 0
04110 DfiTft S
04120 DATA 2
04130 DBTB "CENT HEBT PUMP"
04140 DATA 375000
04150 DBTfl 15000
04160 BBTB 4903
04170 DATA 0
04 ISO DATA as
04190 DATA "CENT HEAT PUMP WHEAT RECOVERY"
04200 DHTA 425000
04S1 0 DATA 17000
04220 DflTfi 3763
04230 DATA 0
04240 DBTfl 25
06350 END
PEBDY
 7?'04^01. 10.*0.55.
PROGRAM LIFCV1

04030 DATA "RH :i2"

04040 BATA -W1PP"
04050 BATH "4-01-7?"
0 4 0 6 0 BATH " M . KLATSKIM"
04070 BATH 7.999
04030 DATA 0
04090 BATH S.7
0410 0 BHTA 0
04110 DATA 8
04120 DATA 2
04130 DATA "CENT HEfiT PUMP WHEAT RECOVERY"
04140 DHTA 425000
04150 DATA 17000
04160 DATA 3762
04170 BATH 0
04130 BHTA 25
04190 BHTA "CENT HEAT PUMP WHEAT RECDV 8. EVAP CODL"
04200 BHTA 449000
04210 DATA 18000
04220 BATH £758
0423 0 BATA 0
04240 BHTA 25
06350 END
REABY.
PRDGRHM RH3

04030 BRTR "RH-3"

04040 DATA "WIPR"
04050 BATA ••4-6-77-
04 0SO BATR "H-N"
04 0?0 BATA 7.999
04 0'SO BATA 0
04090 DATA 5.7
04100 BATA 0
04UO BATA 8
041SO DATA £
04130 BATA '•BASE SYSTEM"
04140 DATA 449000
04150 BP.TA 18000
04160 BATA £758
04170 BATA 0
04180 BATH 25
04190 DATA ••BASE WITH SOLAR A S S I S T "
04200 DATA 571400
04aio DATA £2000
042SO DATA 1422
04230 BATA 0
0424 0 DATA 25
REfltlY.
 77'04/OS. 08.27.10.
PRDGRBM LIFCV1

« U LIFE-CYCLE COST COMPARISONS « S S

••INPUT IHTfl«»
ELISfTBU-L-J LOCATION: WIPP
PRDJ. DIP. NO.: 4-7-77 DESIGNER! H-N
COST OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED. PER MILLION BTU = $7.9800
COST DF STEAM. GAS OR OTHER ENERGY USEE. PER MBTU = J. 0000
YEAPLY ESCALATION RATE FDR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 V.
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FDR STEAM. GAS OR OIL IS .0 %
YEARLY DISCOUNT RATE IS 8.0 Z
NUMBER DF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ARE 2 ALTERNATES
•••RESULTS DF ECONOMIC STUDY"*

ALTERNATE NO. 1 DATA <HEAT PUMP>

INSTALLATION FIRST COST 1300.000.00
ANNUAL D S: M COST <LESS ENERGY).... S32.000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 6725 MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AND/OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 53665.5 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 203096. DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 2.16300E+6 DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. 2 DATA <HEAT P U M P T M ' E C O V E R ' O )

INSTALLATION FIRST COST.....T". ^875.000.00
ANNUAL D 8- M CDST (LESS ENERGY).... S35.000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 5160 MILLION BTU
STEAM, GAS ANIi^DR DIL USED 0 MILLIDN BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TDTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY CDST IS 41176.8 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 190746. DOLLARS
TDTAL PRESENT IJOPTH IS 2.03617E*6 DDLLARS

•••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK PERIODS***

TO GD FRDM ALTERNATE 1* TO ALTERNATE ILPAYBRCK IS 8.2 Y E A R S ^
NERGY SAVINGS>uLM li 2. U5^L+1 DOLLARS
FINAL (YEAR 9) YEARS ENERGY
WITH 1.565 MILLIONS OF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SAVINGSxINVESTNENT RATIO IS 2.758
ENERGY SAVINGS IS 521,666 BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST COST ALTERNATE
 77/-04/09. 03.42.40.
PROGRAM LIFCY1

fJtl LIFE-CYCLE CDST COMPARISONS I M S

••INPUT D B T B "
BLDGltmL^ LDCPlTinMl UIPP
PRDJ. DIR. ND.l 4-7-77 DESIGNER: H-H
COST OF ELECTRICBL ENERGY USEE. PER MILLION BTU =• S7.9800
COST OF STEAM. GAS OR OTHER ENER6Y USED. PER MBTU « t.OOCO
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR ELECTRICITY IS S.7 is
YEBRLY ESCBLBTIDN RfiTE FDR STEAM. GfiS OR OIL IS .0 Z
YEARLY DISCOUNT RBTE IS 8.0 X
NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED BRE 2 ALTERNATES
• ••RESULTS OF ECONOMIC STUDYM^

ALTERNATE HO. 1 DATA (HEAT PUMP M/-RECOVEPY)

INSTALLATION FIRST CDST $375. 000. 00
ANNUAL 0 S. M COST (LESS ENERGY) 135. 000. 00
ELECTRICBL ENERGY USED 5160 MILLION *TU
STEAM. GAS BND^OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 41176.3 DOLLARS
TDTftL ANNUALIZED COST IS 190746. DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 2.03617E»6 DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. 2 DATA (HEAT PUMP U'RECDVERY e^VAP C O O L I N G O

INSTALLATION FIRST CDST S9237TOU. UU
ANNUAL D I M CDST (LESS ENERGY) J36.900.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 3148 MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AND'OR OIL USED 0 MILLION STU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEfiR ENERGY COST IS 25121. DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 168375. DOLLARS
TDTBL PRESENT WORTH IS 1.79737E»6 DDLLBRS

•••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK PERIDDS^M

TO GO FROM ALTERNATE !• TO ALTERNATE £C PAYBACK IS 3.5 YEBRS 2
FINAL (YEAR 4) YEARS ENERGY SAVINGSvLUil IS 2. UUHfc+1 DULLARS
WITH 2.012 MILLIONS OF BTU SAVED PER YEBR.
SBVINGS^INVESTMENT RATIO IS 5.S75
ENERGY SAVINGS IS 1.047.916 BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST CDST ALTERNATE
 77/Q4S08. 08.46.21.
PROGRAM LIFCY1

SSSS LIFE-CYCLE COST COMPARISONS « « S

••INPUT DBTH««
ELBl?=TlPit3> LOCHTIONI WIPP
PROJ. DIR. MO.: 4-7-?? DESIGNER: H-N
COST OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED. PER MILLION BTU - S7.9800
COST OF STEAM. GAS OR OTHER ENERGY USED. PER MBTU = S.0000
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 S
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FDR STEAM. GAS OR OIL IS .0 X
YEARLY DISCOUNT PATE IS S. 0 V.
NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES BEIN6 CONSIDERED ARE 2 ALTERNATES
•••RESULTS OF ECONOMIC STUDY^»»

ALTERNATE ND. 1 IATA (.HEAT PUMP W/RECOVERY 8. EVAP CODLING}

INSTALLATION FIRST COST S9S3.O00.00
ANNUAL D !• » COST (LESS ENERGY>. . .. S36.900.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 3148 MILLION 9TU
STEAM. GAS HND/OP OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE £5 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 25121. DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 1683??.. DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 1.79737E+6 DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. 2 DATA (HEAT PUMP W^RECDVERY 8, EVAP CODLING { SOLAR ASSIST?
INSTALLATION FIRST CDST $1,045.400. 00 ^- -*
ANNUAL 0 S, M COST (LESS ENERGY).... S41.000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 1812 MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AND'OR DIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY CDST IS 14459.8 DDLLARS
TOTAL ANNALIZED COST IS 164839. DDLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 1.75962E+6 DDLLARS

•••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK PERIODS^"

TO GD FROM ALTERNATE 1* TD ALTERNATE 2tPAYBACX IS 18.5 YEARS -J
FINAL (YEAR 19) YEARS ENERGY SAVINGS'CUiT IS S. uVk-H DOLLARS
WITH 1.336 MILLIONS DF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SflVINGS^INVESTMENT RATIO IS 1.308
ENERGY SAVINGS IS £72.875 BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST CDST ALTERNATE
 7 ? ' 0 4 ' 0 8 . (18.£5.52.
PROGRAM LIFCY1

0 4 0 3 0 DATA "TRU-1"
0 4 0 4 0 DATH "W1PP"
0 4 0 5 0 DflTfi "4-7-77"
0 4 0 6 0 DATA "H-H-
0 4 0 7 0 DflTfi 7.98
0 4 0 8 0 DflTfi 0
0 4 0 9 0 DflTfi 5.7
0 4 1 0 0 DATA 0
0 4 1 1 0 DflTfi 8
04120 DATA 2
04130 DATA "HEAT PUMP"
0 4 1 4 0 DATA 800000
0 4 1 5 0 DATA 32000
0 4 1 6 0 EfiTH 6725
04170 DATA 0
0 4 1 3 0 DATA £5
04190 BATH "HEAT PUMP W'RECDVERY"
0 4 2 0 0 IfiTfi 875000
04210 DATA 35000
0 4 2 2 0 DATA 5160
04230 DATA 0
0 4 2 4 0 DflTH 25
06350 END
READY.

r
 r i V O - t ' O S . OS. 3 4 . 3 0 ,
PPDSRflM L1FCYI

04 030 OBTfl " T R U - a "

04040 DBTB " W P P "
04050 I B T f l • • 4 - 7 - ? ? "
04060 n n t n " H - M ~
04070 BRTfi 7 . 9 3
04080 DBTfl 0
04 090 EBTB 5 . ?
04100 DflTfl 0
0 4 1 1 0 DRTB 3
04120 OATH £
04130 OBTB "HEAT PUMP M.-RECOVERY"
04140 DBTB 375000
04150 DRTfi 35000
04160 DBTB 5160
04170 DBTfi 0
04130 JBTB £ 5
04190 DBTB "HEBT PUMP W^PECDVERY «, EVBP C D D L l N f "
04200 OfiTfl ? £ 3 0 0 0
04210 DRTfi 3 6 9 0 0
04E20 DBTB 3148
04230 DflTfi 0
04240 I B T f i £5
READY,
 77S04S06. 08.45.40.
PRDSRBM LIFCY1

04030 BfiTH "TRU-3"

04040 IRTfl "HIPP"
04050 DATA "•-7-77"
04D60 DBTB "H-H"
04 070 IlflTB 7.93
04080 BBTB 0
04090 BBTB 5.7
04100 DBTA 0
04110 DATA 8
04180 DBTB 2
04130 DflTH "HEBT PUMP W^RECOVERY 8. EVfiP C00LIM6"
04140 BBTB -923000
04150 DBTB 36900
04160 DBTB 3146
04170 DHTA 0
04180 BflTfl £5
04190 DATA "HEBT PUMP MxRECOVERY «. EVBP CODLING H SOLAR ASSIST"
04200 DBTB 1045400
04210 DATA 41000
04220 BftTfi 1812
04230 IlflTB 0
04240 DATS 25
06350 EMS
READY.
 t u t LIFE-CYCLE COST COMPARISONS $UJ 1-M-7T
••INPUT PAIR** H
ELDS: ADMINISTRATION ELDS. LOCATION: WIPP
PRDJ. SIR. NO.! CONCEPTUAL DES1SN DESlSHERi
KLATSKIN -' EPOWN
COST OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED. PER MILLION BTU » S9.024,3
COST OF STEAM. 60S OR OTHER E11EPGY USES. PER HBTU = t.0000
YEARLY ESCALATION PATE FOR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 ••:
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOP STERN• GAS OR OIL IS .0 X
YEARLY DISCOUNT RATE IS S.O \
NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ARE 2 ALTERNATES
•••RESULTS OF ECONOMIC STUDY"*

ALTERNATE ND. 1 DATA (PECIP HEAT PUMP)

INSTALLATION FIRST COST $105,000.00
ANNUAL 0 :• I'l COST <LESS ENEPGY) 14.2(1(1.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 2483.9? HlLLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AND'DR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE £5 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 52416.1 DDLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 5419? 3 DOLLARS
TOTAL PPESEHT NORTH IS 573566. DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. 2 DATA fRECIP H.P. W--EVRP)

INSTALLATION FIRST COST 1150.(100 .'JO
ANNUAL 0 i, M COST <LESS ENERGY) J4.S00.00
E'.ECTRICAL ENERGY USED 1901 .2 MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AMD.-DR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY ISDST IS 17157. DDLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 46781.5 DDLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 499S33. DOLLARS

•••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK PERIODS^"

TO GO FROM ALTERNATE 1* TO ALTERNATE 2 PAYBACK IS 3.5 YEARS
FINAL (YEAR 4> YEARS ENERGY SAVINSS^CDST IS 6.56S£*0 DOLLARS
WITH 5S£ MILLIONS OF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SAVINGS'INVESTMENT RATIO IS 6.273
ENERGY SAVINGS IS 971>2SS BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST COST ALTERNATE
 77^04/06, 14.09.4?.
PROGRAM LIFCVI

» S t LIFE-CYCLE COST COMPARISONS SSS*

••INPUT DATBw

%.DG» ADMINISTRATION^ LOCATION! HIPP

PRDJ."SIR. NU.s 4-6-/7 DESIGNER! H-N

COST OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USEI, PER MILLION BTU - J9.0£00

COST OF STEAM, GAS DR OTHER ENERGY USED. PER MBTU • S.0000
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 X
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR STEAM, 6 A S DR OIL IS .0 *
YEARLY DISCOUNT RATE IS 8.0 Js
NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ARE £ ALTERNATES

• ••RESULTS OF ECONOMIC STUDY^~

ALTERNATE NO. 1 DATA (HEAT PUMP>

INSTALLATION FIRST COST *. 00
ANNUAL O %, n COST (LESS ENERGY) 1.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 1336 MILLION BTU
STEAM, GAS AND'OR OIL USED 0 MILLIDN BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE £5 YEARS

RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 12050.7 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS £1591.4 DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS £30483. DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. £ DATA (HEAT PUMP/ld'SOLRR ASSIST? J

INSTALLATION PIRST COST V'J-I H J ^ f 4 0 0 . 00
ANNUAL 0 & M COST (LESS ENERSY> J4>000.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USES 0 MILLION BTU
STEAM, G A S AND^DR OIL USED 0 MILLION B T U
ECONOMIC LIFE £5 YEARS

RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 0 DOLLARS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST IS 15466.3 DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 165099. DOLLARS

•••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK P E R I O D S ^ "

TO SO FROM ALTERNATE 1» TO ALTERNATE S7PAYBACK '^ ' 5 , * Y P a c ^ ->

FINAL (YEAR 16> YEARS ENER6Y S A V I N G S V C K T U li.febL^l DOLLARS
WITH 1,336 MILLIONS OF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SAVINGS'INVESTMENT RATIO IS 1.534
ENERGY SAVINGS IS £78,875 BTU PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.

• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST COST ALTERNATE

 7 7 / 0 4 ^ 0 6 . 14. 0 9 . 1 4 .
PRDSRAM LIFCY1

04030 DATA "ADMINISTRATION "

04040 DATA "WIPP"
04050 DATA "4-6-?7"
04060 DATA "H-N"
04070 DATA 9.02
04030 DATA 0
04090 DATA 5.7
04100 DATA 0
04110 DATA 8
0 4 1 2 0 DflTH 2
04130 DATA "HEAT PUMP"
04140 DATA 0
04150 DATA 0
04160 DATA 1336
04170 DATA 0
04180 DATA 25
04190 OATH "HEAT PUMP U'SDLAR ASSIST"
04200 DATA 122400
04210 DflTfi 4000
042211 DATA 0
04230 DATA 0
04240 DATA 25
06350 END
READY.
 ??'M'06. 14.16.33.
PROGRAM LIFCY1

I M S LIFE-CYCLE CDST COMPARISONS « «

••INPUT DATA^
/STDG: LAUNDRY HOT UATEp LOCATION: WIPP
FKUJ. BJK. NU.: 4-6-77 DESIGNER: H-N
COST OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED. PER MILLION BTU - SI7.3450
COST OF STEAM, GflS DR OTHER ENERGY USED. PER MBTU » S.0000
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR ELECTRICITY IS 5.7 %
YEARLY ESCALATION RATE FOR STEAM. GAS DR OIL IS .0 %
YEARLY DISCOUNT RATE IS 9.0 %
NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES BEING CONSIDERED ARE 2 ALTERNATES
• ••RESULTS OF ECONOMIC 5TUDY4"

RLTERNATE ND. 1 DATA (ELECTRIC HEATER)

INSTALLATION FIRST COST 1. 00
ANNUAL a ( M COST (LESS ENERGY).... $.00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 128 MILLION BTU
STEAM, GAS ANJVDR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 2220.16 DOLLARS
.3TAL ANNUALIZED CDST IS 3977.83 DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 42462.9 DOLLARS

ALTERNATE NO. 2 DATAC(SQLAR HTR.-BODSTEEp

INSTALLATION FIRST"«yijl S18.360. 00
ANNUAL 0 8, M COST (LESS ENERGY) *700. 00
ELECTRICAL ENERGY USED 0 MILLION BTU
STEAM. GAS AND'OR OIL USED 0 MILLION BTU
ECONOMIC LIFE 25 YEARS
RESULTS
TOTAL FIRST YEAR ENERGY COST IS 0 DOLLRRS
TOTAL ANNUALIZED CDST IS 2419.94 DOLLARS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH IS 25832.3 DOLLARS

•••DISCOUNTED PAYBACK PERIODS^

TO GO FROM RLTERNATE !• TD ALTERNATE
FINAL (YEAR 13) YEARS ENERGY SAVINGS'COST IS 4.564E
WITH 128 MILLIONS DF BTU SAVED PER YEAR.
SAVINGS'INVESTMENT RATIO IS 1.906
ENERGY SAVINGS IS 174,291 BTIJ PER ANNUAL DISCOUNTED INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
• - LOWEST INCREMENTAL INSTALLATION FIRST CDST ALTERNATE
 77'04'06. 14.16.00.
PROGRRM LIFCV1
04030 ORTR "LBUNBRY HOT URTER"
04040 DRTR "WIPP"
04OS0 BRTR "4-6-7?"
04060 IRTR -H-N"
04070 BflTH 17.345
04080 JBTR 0
04090 DBTR 5.7
04100 DRTH 0
04110 DRTR 8
04 ISO DHTR 2
04130 DRTR "ELECTRIC HERTER"
04140 DRTR 0
04150 ORTfl 0
04160 DRTB 128
04170 BftTfi 0
04180 DRTR 25
04190 DRTR "SOLAR HTR.-BOOSTER"
04200 DRTR 18360
04210 DflTR 700
04220 DflTft 0
04230 DRTR 0
04240 ERTfl 25
06350 EMD
RERBY.