The document discusses energy conservation strategies, emphasizing the importance of efficiency in water and wastewater facilities to save costs and enhance operations. It highlights the inefficiencies in energy use across various sectors and provides tools and assessments to improve this efficiency. Additionally, the document outlines various opportunities for savings and the need for community education on water usage and conservation practices.

1. How Energy Conservation Can Save You Money!
June 27th, 2013
AEP Workshop
Scott A. Strahley, PE, CEA

2.  Certified Auditors
 Knowledge of Water Systems
 Operations and Processes
vs.
 Equipment and Lights
 Alternative Energy

3.  Short-Term
 Long-Term
 Water Quality?
 Financial Goals?

6.  Energy Efficiency: Simply the process of doing more,
with less. The goal is to accomplish the same tasks
and functions as before, while using less energy.
-California Center for Sustainable Energy
 Through technology and practice
 Without compromising quality, safety, or comfort
Lighting:
All of Them!
24 x 7 x 365!!!!

8. The Impacts of Inefficiency:
Generation: Average 50% Efficient
Transmission/Distribution: Average 93% Efficient
Demand Side: Industrial Assume 90% Efficient
Residential Assume 20% Efficient
The Impact: Industrial Demand = 239%
Residential Demand = 1,075%

9. 0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of day
KW
Peaking Plants &
Power Purchases
As customer demand increases, additional power plants must come on-line to
maintain a reliable electrical system
Intermediate Plants
Base Load Plants

10.  Estimates Are Indicating That:
 Nearly 4% of the nation’s electricity is consumed with
respect to water and wastewater facilities
 Within the next 15 years, the cost of energy will increase
approximately 20%
 An increase in utility budgeting will most likely result in
increased customer billing charges

11.  Estimates Are Indicating That:
 Funding programs have more applications and less
available money
 Commonly, facilities have been designed for peak
capacity, not to operate efficiently
 Most likely the demographics of a community has
changed (up or down)

12.  Understand Your Billing
 Structure (Classification, Tariff, etc.)
 Quantities (kW, kWh, kVAR, Power Factor, etc.)
 Accuracy (Estimated, Monthly, Yearly Averages)
 Understand Your Facility
 Processes
 Flows
 Equipment
 Goals

13.  USEPA’s Energy Star Portfolio Manager
 All Facility Types
 USEPA’s Energy Audit Tool
 Water and Wastewater Systems
 US Dept. of Energy Equipment Evaluation Tools
 PSAT – Pump System Assessment Tool
 MotorMaster +
 Simple Excel Spreadsheet
 RCAP’s Free Assessment (Small & Medium)
 Or Other Program?

14.  Pump Assessment
 Avg. Pump Efficiency is Below 40%
 Over 10% of Pumps Below 10% Efficiency
 SAIC Wisconsin Focus on Energy
 Evaluation of 1,690 Pumps at 20 Process Plants
 Due to:
 Throttling of Valves
 Over-Sizing of Pumps
 ‘We’ve Always Done It That Way’ Mentality
“Pump Slow……Pump Long”

15.  Motor Assessment:
 Replace vs. Repair vs. Burnout
 Repair typically is a Rewind
 Efficiency Can Drop 2-4 % per Rewind
 Study by Ontario Hydro on 10-15 kW Motors
 -0.3% to -3.4% Efficiency Drop
 Typical Cost is 30-60% of a Standard
 Burnout negates Standard Costs
 Only cost of upgrade included in SPB

16.  100 hp TEFC motor costs ~ $4,543
 It costs $12,707 per year to operate
 280% of purchase cost!
 @ 2,920 hours/yr, 75% load, $.07/kWh
 Premium Efficient Saves!
 5%, $670/yr, $10,050/15-yrs
Efficiency Demand Use/Year Cost/Year 15-Yr Cost
90% 62 kW 181,536 kWh $12,707 $190,605
95% 58 kW 171,959 kWh $12,037 $180,555

17.  VFD’s are used for:
 Controlling Speed
 Starting and Acceleration Controls
 Reducing Operating Costs
 VFD’s will only save (energy) costs when used with a
varying load. If the load does not vary, or only varies
slightly, there may be no energy savings. The wider
the variation, the more likely for savings.

18.  Lighting (numbers and locations)
 Interior Ceiling (T-12, T-8, T-5, LED)
 Interior Other (Incandescent, CFL, LED)
 Exterior (Hi-Intensity, Hi-Pressure, Low-Pressure)
 Sensors (Motion, Optical, Timed)
 Rated Watts, Time-of-Use, Bulbs/Fixture, Ballast Type

19.  Others:
 HVAC
 Building Envelope
 Windows
 Lab/Office Equipment
 Water Conservation
 Phantom Energy
 Dehumidifiers
 Water Heaters
Heat Cold

20.  Convoy WWTP

21. 

22.  Analysis
 Village Population 1,110
 Facility Constructed 1938 (upgrade 1987)
 Production (MGD): 0.200 Design, 0.248 Actual
 Annual Energy Use = 391,036 kWh / yr
 Annual Energy Cost = $26,548 / yr
 Average Energy Cost = $0.068 / kWh
 Energy Use = 4,320 kWh / MG (295%)
 Treatment Cost = $293.75 / MG (277%)

23.  Initial Assessment:
 Small
 Moderately Aged (over 25 yrs)
 Low Energy Cost for Region
 High Energy Use
 High Production

24.  Aeration Levels

25.  Flow Analysis

26.  Flow Trends

27.  Water Use?
 Water Production: 0.150 MGD
 500 Connections
 150 gpd per connection = 0.075 MGD
 0.040-0.075 MGD Reduction Potential

28.  Results:
 Focused Analysis –
 Water Use and Disposal
 Main Opportunity
 Water Meter Installation
 Additional Opportunities
 Equipment
 Controls
 Aeration

29.  Pending Capital Improvement Projects
 Additional Water Well
 Additional Storage Tank
 Water Main Replacement
 Upgrade/Replacement of Wastewater Plant

30.  Energy Conservation Opportunities
 Install Water Meters
 Educate Community on Water Use
 Seek Inflow and Infiltration
 Eliminate need for Water Well, Water Tower, Main
Replacement, and Wastewater Plant Upgrade

31.  Summary:

32.  Grant Efforts
 Direct Contracting
 Workshops
 Trainings
 Average 25% Savings
 Energy and Costs
 Less than 1-Year Simple Payback

33.  Benchmark Your Facility
 Compare to Similar Facilities / Systems
 Form An Energy Team
 Define Your Goals
 Decide on Level of Audit (I, II, or III)
 Implementation is Key!
 Track Results
 Pursue Alternative Energy (Renewable)
 Seek Incentives!

34.  Can the Facility Do the Following:
 Eliminate the Equipment?
 Adjust the Equipment Size/Efficiency?
 Reduce the Hours of Usage?
 Talk to the Energy Providers to Re-Classify?
 Have you considered Alternative Energy Sources?
 The ‘EARTH’ process can identify energy conservation
opportunities (ECO’s)

35.  Thank you for your interest! RCAP National Initiative
Ohio RCAP Initiative
Contact:
Scott Strahley, PE, CEA
219 S. Front Street
PO Box 590
Fremont, Ohio 43420
Ph: 419-334-4034
sastrahley@wsos.org