1.1
FSEC Technical Assistance
- All America Homes of Gainesville
All America Homes has been in business for 17 years and builds
10 homes each year in the Gainesville (FL) area. After providing
design assistance for the award wining 2002 home (Figure
3) during the 4 th budget period, BAIHP provided additional
assistance to All America for a second home with solar and
energy efficiency concepts during the 5 th budget period.
The home was built with a photovoltaics (PV) system, and
achieved a HERS rating of 90.6.
|
Figure 3 All America Homes
of Gainesville, 2003 Energy Value Housing Award,
Silver
Medal, Custom Home/Hot Climate. |
This home serves as a model
for the hot-humid climate using a combination of on-site
power generation and energy efficiency to reach near-zero
utility demand, similar to the home built in 2002 (Table 3).
It incorporates energy efficient air conditioning, hydronic solar
water heating, excellent air distribution design and construction
(pressure tested for validation) and right sizing of the heating
and cooling capacity. It also incorporates envelope improvements
in the roof, ceiling, walls, windows and infiltration control.
A passive fresh sir ventilation system provides filtered outside
air to the return side of the mechanical system during operation.
See Appendix C, Florida H.E.R.O. Standard Technical Specifications.
Table 3 All America
Homes of Gainesville (FL) Specifications |
Component |
2002 Home |
2003 Home |
Conditioned Area |
3644 sq ft |
2884 sq ft |
Hers Score |
90.6 |
90.6 |
Utility Cost |
$150 for summer (including water, sewer, and trash pickup)
(Source: Homeowner records) |
Average summer energy use = 58kw/day (Source: Gainesville
Regional Util.) |
Solar: PV Array |
2.5 kW |
1.8 kW |
Solar: Water Heating |
Integrated storage solar collector (4' x 8') EF ~ 2.4 |
Integrated storage solar collector (4' x 8') EF ~ 4.7 |
Solar: Water Heating |
Solar pool heater |
N/A - no pool |
Solar: Attic Ventilation |
PV powered attic fan |
N/A - Unvented attic |
Solar: Outdoor Lighting |
PV (low-voltage) patio lighting |
N/A - no pool |
Heating |
Hydronic coil with solar heated water and gas backup |
Hydronic coil with solar heated water and instantaneous
gas backup |
Cooling |
SEER 14 AC
Variable speed AHU fan
Maintains indoor RH =< 60% |
Dual compressor SEER 17
Variable speed AHU fan
Maintains indoor RH =<60% |
Ducts |
Interior Duct System
Fur down construction |
Interior Duct System in Unvented Attic |
Duct Leakage |
CFM25out < 5%
of AHU flow |
CFM25out <5% of AHU flow |
Roof/Ceiling Assembly |
Radiant barrier roof decking
R-30 dense pack cellulose (ceiling) |
R-20 Icynene at roof decking unvented attic |
Wall Assembly |
R-13 Dense pack cellulose |
R-15 Blown in batt fiberglass |
Windows |
Reduced window area |
|
Glazing & Frame |
Double pane, vinyl frame |
Same |
Window Radiant Gain |
Large overhangs (high windows located beneath the roof
overhangs to provide daylighting without contributing to
solar heat gain) |
Low-E glazing for unshaded east and west windows |
Lighting |
85% fluorescent. |
95% fluorescent |
Infiltration |
Natural
ACH <0.1 |
Est. natural ach =0.059 |
Ventilation |
Filtered passive fresh air inlet on the return side of
AHU |
Same |
Florida Home Energy Rating Organization (Florida H.E.R.O.)
provided an engineered duct system for 26 models in the Regents
Park Townhouse development. This downtown urban infill project
will result in 54 units with Building America features including
ductwork in the conditioned space, outside air ventilation,
and combo hydronic heat and 13 SEER cooling.
- Applegren
Construction, Eastern Dakota Housing Alliance (EDHA)
EDHA set a goal of achieving up to 50% energy savings over
the 1993 Model Energy Code with superior indoor air quality
(AIQ). Phase I (March 2003) and Phase II (Feb 2004) each included
two twin homes (duplexes) for a total of eight homes.
|
Figure 4
Selkirk
Twin Homes, Grand Forks, ND. |
The two story dwellings (Figure 4) include an insulated
basement with air circulation to the main house, suitable for
conversion to living space. Features of the Phase I and Phase
II homes are summarized in Table 5 which also shows
a theoretical base case house using local conventional construction
and code minimums modeled in DOE2 to determine energy savings
and cost effectiveness. Estimated combined gas and electric
utility savings ranged from 25% on Phase I homes to 35% on
Phase II homes over the base case. The homes also met the BA
goal of 40% savings compared to the Benchmark house.
Annual
Energy Use
A performance comparison of the base case and improved structures
is shown in Table 5. The DOE2 model predicts the need
for very little cooling, however many new homes in this area,
including these, are being built with central air conditioning.
Moisture Issues
Phase II of construction added a layer of R-10 rigid extruded
polystyrene (XPS) to the exterior side of the wall assembly.
The low water vapor permeance of rigid XPS foam sheathing (1.1
perms) presents a dilemma in this climate where an interior
vapor barrier (usually 6-mil polyethylene) is considered mandatory
to minimize moisture diffusion from the conditioned space into
the wall cavity. The installation of two vapor barriers leaves
the wall vulnerable to moisture accumulation should water unintentionally
enters the cavity. One BAIHP recommendation calls for removing
the interior vapor barrier and relying on two coats of latex
paint on the interior to limit diffusion from the conditioned
space into the wall. This option allows the wall to dry to
some extent in both directions, but was not chosen by the builder.
Ventilation
A heat recovery ventilator (HRV) mounted in the basement provides
controlled mechanical ventilation with an energy penalty estimated
at $45/year. The unit contains an 80-watt fan that introduces
75 CFM of outside air while exhausting a similar amount at
a heat transfer efficiency of 70%. The HRV can operate either
continuously or on an intermittent 20 minutes on, 40 minutes
off cycle. Intermittent operation was simulated to meet the
old guideline. Attempting to meet the new ASHRAE 62.2 standard
(ASHRAE 1999) would require 42 CFM of continuous ventilation.
For these simulations however, the old ASHRAE guideline of
0.35ACH was used, calling for a continuous rate of 25 CFM.
Table 5 Applegren
Twin Home Specifications |
Component |
Base Case |
Phase I (March 2003) |
Phase II (Feb 2004) |
Conditioned Area
of Each Dwelling |
1840 sq. ft.
(w/ basement) |
Same |
Same |
Hers Score |
85.2 |
89.7 |
92.2 |
Estimated Annual Energy Cost |
$1179 |
$815 |
$701 |
% Cost Savings Compared to Base |
|
25% |
35% |
Heating Cost |
$458 |
$366 |
$294 |
Cooling Cost |
$15 |
$11 |
$10 |
Hot Water Cost |
$245 |
$157 |
$116 |
H/C/WH Total Cost |
$718 |
$534 |
$420 |
Envelope |
Above-Grade
Wall Structure |
2x6 wood frame |
Same |
2x4 wood frame |
Above-Grade
Wall Insulation |
R-19 fiberglass batt |
Same |
R-15 blown fiberglass |
Above-Grade
Wall Sheathing |
Plywood |
Same |
R10
XPS foam corners: R7.5+ plywood |
Basement Walls |
R-11 |
Same |
Same |
Vented Attic |
R-49 |
Same |
Same |
Windows |
Double pane, Low-E, Argon-Filled,
vinyl slider frame
U=0.34, SHGC=0.33
|
Casement
(instead of slider) |
Same as Phase I |
Infiltration (ACH50)
(Including Basement) |
5 (assumed) |
2.8 (average of 4 units) |
2.4
(average of 4 units) |
Equipment |
Gas Furnace |
60 kBtu, AFUE=78 |
60 kBtu, AFUE=92
w/ sealed combustion |
60 kBtu, AFUE=92 |
Gas Furnace Capacity |
29.8 kBtu/h |
33.4 kBtu/h |
30.7 kBtu/h |
Air Conditioner |
1.5 ton, 10 SEER |
Same |
Same |
Air Conditioner Capacity |
9.9 kBtu/h |
10.6 kBtu/h |
10.3 kBtu/h |
Thermostat |
Standard |
Programmable |
Same as Phase I |
Ventilation |
None |
70% efficient HRV |
Same as Phase I |
Water Heater |
40 gallon,
EF=0.88 Electric |
40 gallon, EF=0.62
Natural gas with power vent
|
Tankless, EF=0.83
Natural gas
|
Lighting |
10% fluorescent |
85% fluorescent (linear and CFL) Note:
only bathroom and dimmable fixtures were incandescent) |
Same as Phase I |
Appliances |
Standard |
Energy Star dishwasher
Horizontal-axis washer
Energy Star refrigerator |
Same as Phase I |
Cost Analysis
Tables
6 (Phase I) and 7 (Phase 2) show the
cumulative effect of All Measures in comparison to
the base case home. The heat recovery ventilator (HRV) is also
shown separate from the other measures because the HRV is an
essential IAQ feature, yet it increases energy use by $45/year.
With the exception of the HRV all measures show a positive
cash flow on a 6%, 30 year fixed rate mortgage beginning in
the first year.
Table 6 Economic
Assessment of Phase I Measures*** |
Energy Measure |
Annual
Savings |
Installed
Cost |
Simple
Payback |
First Year
Cash Flow |
Reduce infiltration to 2.8 ACH50 |
$90 |
$325 |
3.6 |
$68 |
Upgrade to 92% direct vent furnace |
$52 |
$600 |
11.5 |
$11 |
Switch to Programmable Thermostat |
$23 |
$130 |
5.7 |
$11 |
Upgrade to Energy Star appliances* |
$61 |
$730 |
12 |
$12 |
Change to EF=0.62 power vented water heater |
$52 |
$520 |
10 |
$16 |
Increase from 10% to 85% fluorescent lighting |
$31 |
$200 |
6.5 |
$17 |
All Measures |
$309 |
$2,505 |
8.1 |
$135 |
Heat recovery ventilation @75cfm,
33% RTF |
($45) |
$1,400 |
N/A |
($134) |
All Measures with HRV |
$264 |
$3,905 |
14.8 |
$1 |
* Energy Star appliances include refrigerator, dishwasher and h-axis clothes
washer.
** First year cash flow based on 30 year
fixed rate mortgage with interest rate of 6%, down payment
of 5%, and discount rate of 5%. A general inflation rate
of 3% per year was applied to the upgrade cost of measures
replaced at end of lifetime. Final value of equipment is
determined by linear depreciation over lifetime. Interest
paid on mortgage is considered tax deductible using a tax
rate of 28%. Energy costs escalate at 3% per year. A property
tax rate of 0.8% was applied to the energy upgrade cost
and is inflated at 3% per year. |
The
higher savings of Phase II over Phase I arise from two energy
saving measures unusual for this region: XPS foam sheathing
with 2x4 framing and tankless gas water heating. Simple paybacks
for these measures were 8.3 and 13.3 years respectively. Electric
water heaters are the current norm in the Grand Forks area,
but with electricity 26% below the national average and natural
gas prices on the rise, simple payback on the tankless model
was relatively long. In addition, fluctuating natural gas prices
complicate the economic analysis. Initial concerns of how the
tankless water heater would perform in this extreme climate
were met with positive feedback through the first winter, which
was colder than normal including an all-time record low of
-44ºF set at the Grand Forks International Airport on
January 30, 2004.
Table
7 Economic Assessment of Phase II Measures |
Energy
Measure |
Annual
Savings |
Installed
Cost |
Simple
Payback |
First
Year
Cash Flow |
Upgrade walls to (R10 sheath + R15 FG batt) |
$72 |
$600 |
8.3 |
$31 |
Reduce
infiltration to 2.4 ACH50 |
$106 |
$325 |
3.1 |
$82 |
Upgrade
to 92% direct vent furnace |
$40 |
$600 |
15.0 |
-$1 |
Switch
to Programmable Thermostat |
$18 |
$130 |
7.2 |
$6 |
Upgrade
to Energy Star appliances* |
$60 |
$730 |
12.2 |
$12 |
Change
to EF=0.83 tankless gas water heater |
$94 |
$1,250 |
13.3 |
$10 |
Increase
from 10% to 85% fluorescent lighting |
$31 |
$200 |
6.5 |
$18 |
All
Measures |
$421 |
$3,835 |
9.1 |
$158 |
Heat
recovery ventilation @75cfm,
33% RTF |
($43) |
$1,400 |
N/A |
($134) |
All
Measures with HRV |
$378 |
$5,235 |
13.8 |
$24 |
Four more dwellings (two duplexes) are slated for completion
in the summer of 2004. See also Cold Climate Case Study:
High Efficiency North Dakota Twin Homes on www.baihp.org .
- Atlantic Design and Construction
Atlantic
Design & Construction (AD&C) is a production
builder located in Gainesville, Florida, who builds about 50
homes a year. Though initially producing homes better than
the Florida Energy Code minimum, Florida HERO worked with AD&C
to increase their efficiency to Energy Star and then to Building
America standards. (Table 8). The new upgrades resulted
in homes achieving an average HERS score of 89.
|
Figure 5 Atlantic
Design and Construction
home in the Mentone neighborhood. |
Savings
from the increased the cooling system efficiency more than
offset the additional $250 to $375 needed for improved duct
sealing and insulation and air sealing protocol adjustments.
This savings, while sufficient to offset those costs, were
not enough to pay for all implemented measures. Instead,
increasing the price of the home by $1,250 was sufficient
to cover the additional costs and derive an excellent profit
margin. Despite adding $1,250 to $2,500 to home buyer costs
up-front, AD&C's
award-winning development, Mentone, has been the best-selling
subdivision in Alachua County for four years running (Figure
5).
Kenny
Brekenridge, AD&C Project Manager,
says that the company believes with energy costs continuing
to rise that it makes sense to build energy efficient, and
that they emphasize the Building America improvements in
their sales literature and discussions.
Table
8 Atlantic Design and Construction Specifications |
Component |
Original |
Mentone |
Conditioned Area |
1800-2400 sq. ft |
1800-2400
sq. ft |
Hers Score |
~82 |
~89 |
Selling Price |
~$90,000 |
$190,000 - $325,000 |
Cooling |
SEER 10 with standard thermostat |
System sized using Manual
J, SEER 13 with passive, filtered ventilation air and
programmable thermostat |
Ducts |
Local conventional construction |
System
engineered using manual d, mastic sealed, and performance
tested to have cfm25out < 5%
of AHU flow |
Ceiling Insulation |
R-30 fiberglass |
R-30 cellulose |
Wall Assembly |
R-11 fiberglass |
R-13 cellulose |
Windows |
Double pane clear metal frame |
Double pane Low-E |
Lighting |
Standard |
Air lock can lights |
In
the summer of 2003, Avis American Homes tested an alpha prototype
Status and Control System (STACS) developed by the UCF Constructability
Lab researchers (BAIHP Partner). The system is a real-time
shop floor labor data collection and reporting system. Production
workers use wireless laser scanners to report their current
work assignment. STACS reporting is web based and provides
both real time manufacturing status and summaries of historical
production performance (Figure 6). While labor represents
a relatively modest fraction of production cost, typically
10-15%, it has a profound impact on operations, including product
quality, cycle time, material waste, and labor productivity.
|
Figure 6 STACS system
components and relationships. |
Avis American employees tested STACS in drywall finishing
operations. Test results demonstrated that production workers
could operate the system effectively and that the system accurately
captured scanned activity.
See also Penn Lyon Homes (Technical Assistance section)
and Status and Control System (STACS) (Research Section
III).
|