Medical Construction & Design

NOV-DEC 2012

Medical Construction & Design (MCD) is the industry's leading source for news and information and reaches all disciplines involved in the healthcare construction and design process. To view more past issues go to: http://mcdmag.epubxpress.com

Issue link: https://mcdmag.epubxp.com/i/91780

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 17 of 62

Oklahoma City VA Medical Center Oklahoma City, Okla. Gross Floor Area O&M; Issues Identifi ed Measures Identifi ed Measures Implemented Annual Cost Savings Simple Payback Period 946,534 sf 132 7 3 $121,737/year 6.1 years low/no-cost operational improvements that do not require equipment upgrades or retrofi ts. Though diffi cult to distinguish which type of EBCx is superior, each type offers similar overall benefi ts. In practice, the best EBCx type is one that meets the following criteria: > Affordability: The EBCx process should be affordable. According to Building Com- missioning: A Golden Op- portunity of Reducing Energy Costs and Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Evan Mills, the median cost for EBCx com- missioning provider services is $0.30/sf. Based on experi- ence, the provider costs for EBCx for hospitals typically varies from $0.11/sf to $0.80/ sf based on certain factors (i.e., project site location, complexity of building sys- tems, availability of construc- tion or as-built drawings). > Cost-effectiveness: The project should also be cost- effective, providing a return on the investment. Accord- ing to Mills, EBCx has been shown to provide median whole-building energy sav- ings of 16 percent of baseline energy use, cost savings of $0.29/sf per year, a benefi t ratio of 4.5, cash-on-cash returns of 91 percent and a simple payback of 1.1 years. Based on experience, the simple payback period is typi- cally longer for hospitals, and can vary from 2 to 7 years. > Past commissioning efforts: Any past commis- sioning efforts, whether during original construction or an RCx project, should be factored into the decision- making process. For ex- ample, for hospitals that have never been commissioned, ReCx would not be a good fi t because ReCx indicates commissioning of a building that has been commissioned in the past. > Building controls: The type of system control- ling the HVAC, lighting and process systems in a hospital should be included in the decision-making process. For example, hospitals that have a hybrid pneumatic/ DDC system may fi nd MBCx not a good fi t due to the initial capital investment required to potentially upgrade the controls system to the newest version that includes FDD and EIS capabilities. > Age of equipment: In older facilities, the age of the equipment and controls can have a big impact on the feasibility of moving forward with an EBCx project. If the building systems need to be upgraded as part of a renova- tion project, the EBCx scope can include commissioning the renovation project, as well as the rest of the building. An option that can be explored to help determine which EBCx process would best suit a hospital's needs is to allow an EBCx provider to perform a Scoping or Assessment study. This study typically costs between $0.05/ sf and $0.15/sf and involves a one-day to one-week onsite study to identify the "low-hanging fruit" such as obvious/easily identifi able O&M; issues, low/no-cost energy-saving measures and potential capital-intensive projects. The outcome of the study is to determine the feasibility of successfully implementing an EBCx process at the hospital, and a rough estimate of energy savings and cost reduction that could be achieved. When the right process is implemented at a hospital, EBCx can provide a cost-ef- fective and affordable means to reduce energy costs. When the right path is chosen, EBCx has been shown to pro- vide median whole-building energy savings of 16 percent, with a median provider cost of $0.30/sf and a simple pay- back period of 1.1 years. Christopher Morales, LEED AP O+M, is a project manager at SSRCx in Nashville, Tenn. He provides energy and water-con- servation consulting services to owners of existing buildings. www.mcdmag.com November/December 2012 | Medical Construction & Design 13

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Medical Construction & Design - NOV-DEC 2012