1 / 3

Subcommittee Report

Subcommittee Report. Review of SBW’s Proposal for Determining Energy Savings from Low-Flow Faucet Aerators in Commercial Restrooms Regional Technical Forum August 3 rd , 2010. Background.

sibley
Download Presentation

Subcommittee Report

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Subcommittee Report Review of SBW’s Proposal for Determining Energy Savings from Low-Flow Faucet Aerators in Commercial Restrooms Regional Technical Forum August 3rd, 2010

  2. Background • SBW submitted a proposal to estimate energy savings for commercial faucet aerators (posted on June 29th 2010 RTF meeting agenda website) • Estimated savings potential • Water: 1.6 million CCF/year • Gas: 1.5 million therms/year • Electricity: 8.8 aMW (287 kWh/unit) • Month pre and post in-field metering of hot and cold water use • Sample sizes ranging from 51 to 202 depending on desired statistics • Estimated projec cost ranges from $80k to $290k depending on sample size • RTF subcommittee tasked with reviewing the proposal and providing a recommendation to the RTF

  3. Subcommittee • Met July 12th – conference call • Attendees • Wade Carey • Mike Baker (Note: SBW’s proposal) • Faith DeBolt (Note: SBW’s proposal) • Brady Peeks • Nick O’Neil • Charlie Grist • Adam Hadley • Discussed the proposal in detail • Q: Should study be designed to provide disaggregated savings? For example: office buildings, restaurants, “high traffic” • A: No, the initial study should focus on generic “public access, non-residnential sinks” • Q: Removal rate – should it be studied? Some anecdotes say “yes”. • A: PSE may be interested in studying this through surveying participants in their recent program. PSE and ETO report positive feedback from participants in their programs. • Q: Will the flow meters provide the necessary accuracy at these low flows? • A: Jury is still out, but SBW did provide additional data on proposed meters (below). • Overall Recommendation • Add this to the 2011 RTF work plan at $100,000 (51 sites)

More Related