2.5.3. Energy Cost Savings
Energy costs have escalated dramatically in the recent past, creating a renewed concern and
commitment to the reduction of energy costs. Implementation of the recommendations in
this report will result in lower utility bills.
Courtroom lighting design varies dramatically and it is not feasible or appropriate to
provide any guarantee of energy cost savings. However, for the purposes of providing an
example a life-cycle cost analysis was completed to show possible energy cost savings in a
typical courtroom. District Courtroom 13B in the Perry Courthouse, Columbia, SC was
considered the most typical and representative and was chosen for the analysis. For this
report the estimated energy savings is based on a redesign that included the replacement of
PAR incandescent downlights with dedicated dimming compact fluorescent downlights,
and a retrofit of the non-dim linear fluorescent T8's to high performance T8 systems. The
energy and cost savings are shown in Table 6.
Table 6. Present Value Costs and Energy Savings Summary
Average Annual Consumption (kWh) and Costs ($)
Life Cycle
Description
Savings
Base Case
Alternative Design
Savings
40,622 kWh
19,358 kWh
21,264 kWh
531, 527 kWh
138.6 Mbtu
66.1 Mbtu
72.6 Mbtu
1,814 Mbtu
Future Costs
,303
,838
,466
Present Value
,303
,799
,505
Life-Cycle Costs
NOTES: (1) Comparative analysis was completed using Building Life-Cycle Cost (BLCC)
software version 5.3-05 from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and is
consistent with Federal life-cycle cost methodology and procedures, 10CFR, Part 436, Subpart
A. (2) Future Costs include energy consumption costs, and recurring and non-recurring
operation, maintenance and replacement (OM&R) costs. (3) See Appendix D for the complete
output of the BLCC analysis.
Additional findings from the life-cycle cost analysis include the following:
Savings-to-Investment Ratio (SIR) of 5.57
Adjusted Internal Rate of Return (AIRR) of 10.32%
Payback period of four years.
March 2006
Page 14
Previous Page
