Sustainable Buildings Assignments

Energy Audit &
Retrofit Feasibility

P a u l F u r b a c h e r 9 9 5 9 4 0 1 0 2
B r e t t S a g e r t 9 9 7 2 3 3 8 4 5
S h u l i a n g ( P e t e r ) S u n 9 9 6 0 0 7 4 4 0

Tutorial #1
House Drawings, Thermal Resistances & Exposed Areas.

Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2
Thermal Resistances ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Basement Wall Section ............................................................................................................................. 3
Main Floor Wall Section ............................................................................................................................ 3
2
nd
Floor Wall Section ............................................................................................................................... 4
Roof ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
Basement Floor Slab ................................................................................................................................. 5
Windows ................................................................................................................................................... 5
Exposed Area ................................................................................................................................................ 6
Windows ................................................................................................................................................... 6
Walls .......................................................................................................................................................... 7
References .................................................................................................................................................... 7
Appendix 1: House Drawings & Images ........................................................................................................ 8
Appendix 2: Thermal Resistance Summary Reference ............................................................................... 11

Introduction
For this energy audit and retrofit feasibility study we chose Paul Furbachers house located in
the East York region of Toronto. The house was originally built in 1948 as a single dwelling bungalow. In
1996 the house was converted from a single story dwelling to a two story house shortly after the
Furbachers purchased the house. At this time the main floor bedrooms were converted into a kitchen
and dining room and the existing kitchen was removed and converted into a larger living room. At this
time a forced air condensing natural gas furnace was installed to accommodate the increased heating
load of a second storey. In 2008 the basement family room was finished and converted into a bachelor
apartment, complete with kitchen and bathroom. All renovations were performed by the owner; thus
there can be considerable confidence that the actual composition of the wall sections is consistent and
matches the plans.
The entrance to the house is facing south. Also on the southern faade are the two bay windows
that take advantage of the solar path: one on the main floor for the living room and the other for the
master bedroom. The northern faade has three sets of sliding glass doors, one on the main floor to
allow access to the backyard and two on the second floor to act as windows; these windows are for
visual and access purposes only. The western faade consists of two large windows to allow light into
the entrance of the house and two small patterned windows located in the bathrooms to allow for some
natural lighting without breaching privacy. Lastly the eastern faade has no windows for privacy reasons.
Appendix 1 contains the plan and elevation drawings for the house, as well as selected photographs of
the exterior.
The house location is shown in the following figure:

Figure 1: House Location and Heading
Thermal Resistances
The house has 3 distinct wall sections, and 2 distinct floor sections and a uniform roof section. In
the following analysis, a composite thermal resistance value is developed for each. The exposed area (to
either air or earth) for each section is also presented. Appendix 2 contains the tables for reference.
Basement Wall Section
The basement wall section was split into two parts, the part of the wall that was below grade
and the part of the wall that was above grade. The basement wall was section is uniform concrete block
throughout, however an additional thermal resistance is gained due to the insulation of the ground
itself. The part of the basement that was below grade has an R value of 2.7 and the part above grade has
an R value of 1.2. Tables 1 and 2 present this calculation:
Table 1: Below Grade Wall R Value
Typical Wall Section Basement Below Grade
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Concrete Block 10" 1.2
Earth 1.5
Total 2.7

Table 2: Above Grade Wall R Value
Typical Wall Section Basement Above Grade
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Total 1.2

Main Floor Wall Section
The main floor wall sections were built in the late 1940s so very little thermal resistance was
required to meet code. The majority of the walls thermal resistance comes from the brick and the air
space that are located within the wall section. For the R value calculation regarding the 1 strapping we
took this to be the same as an air space since the strapping is mostly used to allow extra room for wiring
or plumbing. The total R value for the main floor walls came out to be 4.05. Table 3 presents the results:

Table 3: Main Floor Wall R Value
Typical Wall Section Main Floor

Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value

Brick 4" 0.8

Air 1" 1

Brick 4" 0.8

Strapping 1" 1
*Based on additional air
spacing
Drywall 0.5" 0.45

Total 4.1

2
nd
Floor Wall Section
For the second floor walls we see values that are much higher than the wall sections in the
previous two floors. This is because the second floor walls were built more recently and to a higher
building code. Based on calculations from knowing what is in the walls, we got an R value of 20.43.
However we speculate that the value is closer to an R value of 16. The reasoning behind this assumption
is due to the fact that there will be thermal bridging due to the wood framing, reducing the thermal
resistance of the section. Table 4 shows the calculation:
Table 4: 2nd Floor Wall R Value
Typical Wall Section Second Floor

Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value

Stucco 0.75" 0.15

Plywood 0.5" 0.63

Batt Insulation w/
2x6" Framing 6" 19.2
*Lower due to thermal bridging from
framing
Vapor Barrier 6MI 0

Drywall 0.5" 0.45

Total 20.5

Roof
The way that the house was built, we are only going to consider the thermal insulation that is
placed on top of the ceiling layer; the rest of the attic space will be counted as an external space, as it is
vented to the outside. The attic space is an extremely well insulated area and we calculated an R value
of 40.05. Again, from the framing we expect the value to be lower, due to thermal bridging, and
estimated the actual R value to be closer to 35. Table 5 presents this:
Table 5: Roof Section R Value
Typical Roof Section

Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value

Batt Insulation w/
2x6" Framing 12" 26.4

Batt Insulation w/
*Lower due to thermal bridging from
framing
Vapor Barrier 6MI 0

Drywall 0.5" 0.45

Total 40.1

Basement Floor Slab
Since the basement floor is just slab on grade concrete there is very little thermal resistance.
The typical floor section has an R value of 0.32 with the exception of the family room which has
additional wood flooring making the total for that section 1.07. The value is given in Tables 6 & 7:
Table 6: Basement Floor R Value
Typical Floor Basement Section
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Concrete Slab 4" 0.32
Total 0.32

Table 7: Basement Family Room Floor R Value
Typical Floor Basement Section Family
Room
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Wood Flooring 0.5" 0.75
Total 1.1

Windows
There are two types of windows in this house; there are the single pane windows located in the
basement from the original house specs with an R value of 0.91 and then there are the double pane
windows that were installed everywhere else when the house was first purchased and renovated which
have an R value around 2.1. A detailed inventory is presented in the next section.
Exposed Area
Windows
Refer to plan and elevation drawings (Appendix 1) for detailed window locations.

Basement Windows

Location Width Height Description R-Value Area (sqft)
Area
(m2)
B-1 N 31 24 Single pane x2 w/woodframe 0.91 5.17 0.48
B-2 N 31 24 Single pane x2 w/woodframe 0.91 5.17 0.48
B-3 W 37.5 21 Double Pane 2.1 5.47 0.51
B-4 W 31 24 Single pane x2 w/woodframe 0.91 5.17 0.48
B-5 E 31 24 Single pane x2 w/woodframe 0.91 5.17 0.48

Total 26.14 2.43

Main Floor Windows

Area
(m2)
M-1 W 37 32 Double Pane 2.1 8.22 0.76
M-2 W 22 11 Door Window Half Circle Pane 0.91 1.68 0.16
M-3 S 58 53 Bay Windows 2.1 21.35 1.98
M-4 S 13 54 Bay Side Windows x 4 2.1 19.50 1.81
M-5 E 37 32 Double Pane 2.1 8.22 0.76
M-6 W 22 38.5 Bathroom Window 0.91 5.88 0.55
M-7 N 61 40 Double Pane 2.1 16.94 1.57
M-8 N 60 80
Sliding Glass Door Double
Pane 0.91 33.33 3.10

(Seal compromised) Total 115.13 10.70

Second Floor Windows

Area
(m2)
S-1 W 37 32 Double Pane 2.1 8.22 0.76
S-2 W 22 38.5 Bathroom Window 0.91 5.88 0.55
S-3 S 35 51 Double Pane 2.1 12.40 1.15
S-4 S 58 53 Bay Windows 2.1 21.35 1.98
S-5 S 13 54 Bay Side Windows x 4 2.1 19.50 1.81
S-6 N 60 80
Pane 2.1 33.33 3.10
S-7 N 60 80
Pane 2.1 33.33 3.10
S-8 E 24 48 Sky Light x 2 2.1 16.00 1.49

Total 150.01 13.94
Walls

Wall Area
(sqft)
Wall Area
(m2)
Basement (Below Grade) 348.00 32.33
Basement (Above Grade) 398.86 37.06
Main Floor 867.57 80.60
2nd Floor 872.79 81.08

References
1) R-Value Table. All Wall Systems. Accessed Jan 2013. Available at
http://www.allwallsystem.com/design/RValueTable.html
2) R-Values of Common Building Materials. Grassroots. Accessed Jan 2013. Available at
http://www.grassroots.ca/homeowner_help_articles/building-material-r-values.php
3) Wakk Strapping Construction Method. Dremel. Accessed Jan 2013. Available at
http://diyguides.dremel.com/wall-strapping-construction-method-2496.html
4) Glass Performance. All Weather Windows. Accessed Jan 2013. Available at
http://www.allweatherwindows.com/windows.php?sid=131

Appendix 1: House Drawings & Images
See attached CAD drawings for plan and elevation views.

Figure 2: South Facade

Figure 3: West Facade

Figure 4: North Facade

Appendix 2: Thermal Resistance Summary Reference
Section Summary
Location R Value
Wall Section Basement Below Grade 2.7
Wall Section Basement Above Grade 1.2
Wall Section Main Floor 4.1
Wall Section Second Floor 16
Roof Section 35
Floor Basement Section 0.32
Floor Basement Section Family Room 1.1

Typical Wall Section Basement Below Grade
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Earth 1.5
Total 2.7

Typical Wall Section Basement Above Grade
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Total 1.2

Typical Wall Section Main Floor
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Brick 4" 0.8
Air 1" 1
Brick 4" 0.8
Strapping 1" 1
Drywall 0.5" 0.45
Total 4.05

Typical Wall Section Second Floor
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Stucco 0.75" 0.15
Plywood 0.5" 0.63
Batt Insulation w/
Vapor Barrier 6MI 0
Drywall 0.5" 0.45
Total 20.43

Typical Roof Section
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Batt Insulation w/
2x6" Framing 12" 26.4
Batt Insulation w/
Vapor Barrier 6MI 0
Drywall 0.5" 0.45
Total 40.05

Typical Floor Basement Section
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Total 0.32
Typical Floor Basement Section Family
Room
Material Type
Material
Thickness
R Value
Wood Flooring 0.5" 0.75
Total 1.07

Estimating Home
Energy Losses

S h u l i a n g S u n 9 9 6 0 0 7 4 4 0
P a u l F u r b a c h e r 9 9 5 9 4 0 1 0 2
B r e t t S a g e r t 9 9 7 2 3 3 8 4 5

Tutorial # 2
Utility baseline calculation.

1

Contents Page

Summary of Results . 2

Methods .. 3

Discussion 4

Reference .. 5

Appendix 1. . 6

Appendix 2. .. 10

2

Table 2. Comparison of Heat loss calculation to Baseline

Annual Avg/Month

Annual Avg/Month
Heat loss calculation
Baseline
kwh/m^2 (house = 253m^2) 35.7 3.6 kwh/m^2
70 5.83
Cost / m^2
$67.58 $5.63

Marginal Utility Rates for natural gas (Enbridge)
Current Marginal Cost (Jan 2013 bill) (cents/m3) 10.7303
Energy Content (PEF = 1.0057)

38MJ/m3

4%
11%
7%
2%
1%
54%
11%
2%
3%
5%
Chart 1. Heating Loss by Section
Wall Section Below Grade
Wall Section Above Grade
Wall Section Main Floor
Wall Section Second Floor
Floor Section Roof
Floor Section Slab on Grade
Floor Section Slab on Grade Family Room
Windows R value 0.91
Windows R value 2.1
Air Infiltration Volume
Summary of Results

Table 1. Heat loss Calculation by month (*July and August excluded because no heat loss to outside)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Sept Oct Nov Dec Total
MJ / Month 8,646 7,627 6,499 5,233 4,262 3,286 ,3655 4,886 5,703 6,881 56,678
% 15 13 11 9 8 6 6 9 10 12 100
Cost Includes monthly:
$20 Customer Charge
$23.35 Delivery
$17.24 Transport to Enbridge
Variable Gas Charge (Current Marginal Cost)
13% HST

3

Methods
Heat loss calculation
The heat loss calculation done by using the heat loss equation to calculate the energy loss per
month for every section (wall, window, slab), then summing it to get the annual value. This
annual value was then divided by floor area of the house (253 m^2) to get the Energy/m^2. July
and August months were excluded from these calculations because they are considered cooling
seasons.
Heat loss equation Q = A*(1/R)*T
- For wall sections exposed to air T was taken as the difference of average monthly outdoor
temperature given by Environment Canada and indoor temperature (21 C).
- For slab on grade the T = 7C (ground temp) 21C (inside temp) = 14 C
- For Basement wall section below ground the T was taken as (7 C + average outside air
temp)/2
-
The air infiltration heat loss used the equation: Q = 0.018*V*T*ACH
- V is the volume of the house, assumed to be a rectangle with volume 22,548 ft^3
- ACH (air change per hour): assumed to be 2.5
A sensitivity analysis was done on model by testing different assumptions such as varying indoor
air temp between 19 C and 23 C and varying ACH value to 2.5 (Normal leaks house),
5(Medium leak), and 10 (very Leaky House). Below is the Scenario Summary.
Table 3. Scenario
Summary
Current Values: Temp +2
Temp -
2
Normal
Leaks
Medium
Leakage
Very
Leaky
Warm and
Leaky
Changing:
Interior Temp 21 23 19 21 21 21 23
ACH 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 5 10 10
Result Cells:
Energy per m2 (kWh/m2) 35.73 40.71 30.74 35.73 44.91 63.29 72.12

Baseline Calculation
The base line calculation for the house was found through summing the monthly natural gas
consumption in m^3 for the past two years and using that information to find Energy/m^2 and

4

Cost/m^2. The sum volume of natural gas consumed for 2011 and 2012 averaged to find the
annual volume for natural gas.
Annual Energy (MJ) = (
12

)*38MJ/m^3 * PEF
Annual Energy(kwh)/m^2 = Annual Energy (MJ)/ 3.6 /253 m^2
Annual Cost = [Annual Energy (MJ) * Current Marginal Cost + 12 (month)*( $20 + $23.35 +
$17.24)] * 1.13 = $1710
Annual cost/m^2 = Annual cost / 253 m^2
A sensitivity analysis was done on varying water heating baseline(m^3) per month to see the
effects it would have on Annual Energy/m^2. Below is the Scenario Summary.
Table 4. Scenario Summary

Current
Values:
Water Heater
to 80
Water Heater
to 40
Water Heater to
100
Changing Cells:
Water Heating Baseline (m^3) 67 80 40 100
Result Cells:

Annual energy per m2
(kWh/m2) 70 63 84 53
Annual Cost $810.98 $792.06 $850.26 $762.96

Discussion
With present analysis the Heat loss calculations predict annual energy per
of about 36
kwh/
which is a factor of 2 away from baseline of 70 kwh/
. However, by increasing the

ACH and interior temperature the kwh/
increases and vice versa. With a warm and leaky

house using interior temp of 23 C and ACH 10 having 72.12 kwh/
. This value is almost spot

on with current baseline value of 70 kwh/
. Therefore from the results a hypothesis could be

put forth that the house in study is a very leaky house.
Although a warm and leaky house does reflect the human psychology which tends to set
interior temperature higher during winter and lower temperature during summer but over the
span of the entire year the temperature should average out to 21 C. According to the Very
Leaky scenario this would give 63.29 kwh/
. From the visit to Pauls house the team

gathered that Pauls family uses the bath quite often therefore it would be sensitive to increase
water heater baseline/month to 80 m^3 which would give an annual baseline energy consumption
of 63 kwh/
. Based on information gathered and sensitivity analysis performed it would seem

that 63 kwh/
is a reasonable figure to conclude for the energy intensity of the house.

5

There are numerous sources of error in the analysis that wasnt included in this report but should
be considered in the future. They include heat loss due to window/door opening, temperature
fluctuation by year, energy gain by people, and energy gain by appliances.

References:
Online reference and tools, Feb 06, 2013,
http://www.rapidtables.com/convert/energy/BTU_to_kWh.htm
Home loss heat calculator, Feb 06, 2013,
http://www.builditsolar.com/References/Calculators/HeatLoss/HeatLoss.htm
Canada Climate Normals 1971 2000, Canada National Climate data and Information Achieve,
Environment Canada,
http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_e.html?stnID=5051&lang=e&dCode=
1&province=&provBut=&month1=0&month2=12

6

Appendix 1: Heat loss Calculation

Daily
Average Days
Inside
Temp Temp Dif C
Temp Dif
F
Jan -4.2 31 21 25.2 45
Feb -3.2 28 21 24.2 44
Mar 1.3 31 21 19.7 35
Apr 7.6 30 21 13.4 24
May 14.2 31 21 6.8 12
Jun 19.2 30 21 1.8 3
Jul 22.2 31 21
Cooling Season
Cooling
Season Aug 21.3 31 21
Sep 17 30 21 4 7
Oct 10.6 31 21 10.4 19
Nov 4.8 30 21 16.2 29
Dec -0.9 31 21 21.9 39

Location
Area
(sqft)
Area
(m2)
R-
Valu
e U-Value January February March
Wall Section Below
Grade 348 32.33 2.7 0.37037037
181,238 157,203 141,682
Wall Section Above
Grade
398.8
6 37.06 1.2 0.833333333
467,384 405,401 365,376
Wall Section Main
Floor
867.5
7 80.6 4.1 0.243902439
297,547 258,087 232,606
Wall Section Second
Floor
872.7
9 81.08 16 0.0625
76,705 66,533 59,964
Floor Section Roof
1128.
6 104.85 35 0.028571429
45,343 39,329 35,446
Floor Section Slab on
Grade 525 48.77 0.32 3.125
2,306,98
1
2,001,03
8
1,803,473
Floor Section Slab on
Grade Family Room
383.8 35.66 1.1 0.909090909 490,622 425,557 383,542
Windows R value 0.91 67.44 6.27 0.91 1.098901099 104,210 90,390 81,466
Windows R value 2.1
223.8
4
20.80 2.1 0.476190476 149,883 130,006 117,171
Air Infiltration Volume 22548
1,426,77
4
1,237,56
1
1,115,375
Monthly Total BTU
5,546,68
8
4,811,10
6 4,336,102
Monthly kWh 1626 1410 1271
Monthly MJ 5852 5076 4575

7

Cost

$87.12 $84.65 $83.06

Location Area (sqft) Area (m2) R-Value U-Value April May
Wall Section Below Grade 348 32.33 2.7 0.37037037 93,264 48,906
Wall Section Above Grade 398.86 37.06 1.2 0.83333333 240,513 126,120
Wall Section Main Floor 867.57 80.6 4.1 0.24390244 153,116 80,290
Wall Section Second Floor 872.79 81.08 16 0.0625 39,472 20,698
Floor Section Roof 1128.6 104.85 35 0.02857143
23,333 12,235
Floor Section Slab on Grade 525 48.77 0.32 3.125
1,187,156 622,519
Family Room
383.8 35.66 1.1 0.90909091 252,471 132,390
67.44 6.27 0.91 1.0989011 53,626 28,120
Windows R value 2.1
223.84 20.80 2.1 0.47619048 77,129 40,445
734,208 385,003
Monthly Total BTU 2,854,287 1,496,725
Monthly kWh 837 439
Monthly MJ 3011 1579
Cost

$78.08 $73.53

Location Area (sqft) Area (m2) R-Value U-Value June September
Floor Section Roof 1128.6 104.85 35 0.02857143 3,134 6,965
Floor Section Slab on Grade 525 48.77 0.32 3.125 159,469 354,375

8

Family Room
383.8 35.66 1.1 0.90909091 33,914 75,364
67.44 6.27 0.91 1.0989011 7,203 16,008
Windows R value 2.1
223.84 20.80 2.1 0.47619048 10,361 23,024
98,625 219,167
Monthly Total BTU 383,412 852,026
Monthly kWh 112 250
Monthly MJ 405 899
Cost

$69.79 $71.36

Location Area (sqft) Area (m2) R-Value U-Value October November
Floor Section Slab on Grade 525 48.77 0.32 3.125 952,088 1,435,219
Family Room
383.8 35.66 1.1 0.90909091 202,479 305,226
67.44 6.27 0.91 1.0989011 43,007 64,831
Windows R value 2.1
223.84 20.80 2.1 0.47619048 61,857 93,245
588,827 887,625
Monthly kWh 671 1011
Cost

$76.19 $80.08

Location Area (sqft) Area (m2) R-Value U-Value December
Section
Total
Wall Section Below Grade 348 32.33 2.7 0.37037037 157,505 1,007,715
Wall Section Above Grade 398.86 37.06 1.2 0.83333333 406,179 2,598,732
Wall Section Main Floor 867.57 80.6 4.1 0.24390244 258,582 1,654,409

9

Floor Section Slab on Grade 525 48.77 0.32 3.125 2,004,877 12,827,194
Family Room
383.8 35.66 1.1 0.90909091 426,374 2,727,939
67.44 6.27 0.91 1.0989011 90,564 579,427
Windows R value 2.1
223.84 20.80 2.1 0.47619048 130,256 833,376
1,239,935
7,933,099
Monthly kWh 1413 9038
Cost

$84.68 $788.54

Appendix 2. Baseline calculation
month period volume E (MJ)

Energy Content = 38MJ/m3
1 32 514 19532

PEF = 1.0057
2 31 512 19456

Baseline monthly water heating (m3)
3 27 271 10298

House Area (m2)
4 30 352 13376

Current Marginal Cost (Jan 2013 bill)
(cents/m3)
5 34 106 4028

6 29 37 1406

7 29 148 5624

8 33 12 456

9 29 138 5244

10 30 72 2736

11 29 257 9766
Total Volume
(m3) Total Energy (MJ)
12 31 292 11083 1907 72452.814
1 30 410 15592

2 34 410 15592

3 28 236 8981

4 33 242 9210

5 22 67 2561

6 30 85 3248

10

7 31 47 1796

8 31 74 2828

9 29 39 1490

10 32 151 5732

11 29 197 7490
Total Volume
(m3) Total Energy (MJ)
12 28 296 11236 1453 55206.0504

Tutorial #3 HOT 2000 Modeling and Discussion
Paul Furbacher 995940102, Brett Sagert 997233845, Shuliang (Peter) Sun 996007440
Discussion
After completing the HOT 2000 model and comparing it to the energy bills and hand
calculations, in the previous assignment, we noticed significant discrepancies. In order to discuss
possible discrepancies in further details we created a summary table as shown below for use
when referencing the data.
Table 1. Energy consumption of various models
Energy Type Bills HOT2000 Hand Calculation
Natural Gas (m3) 1900 6815 1725
Electricity (kWh) 13200 1278 -
Hot Water (MJ) 25000 23400 -

As we can see given the results from the HOT 2000 model the natural gas consumption was
6815m^3. This result however is about 4 times greater than our calculated value and 3.5 times
greater than what the energy bill baseline showed. For the electricity consumption generated by
the model we saw consumption values far below the actual energy bills. Possible reasons for
discrepancy could be attributed to errors in modeling and what we used in reality. The domestic
hot water use on the other hand was modeled very accurately when compared to the bills as there
was only a small difference in the values.
The large differences in electricity consumption can be explained by the large phantom loads,
intermittent loads and large electronic appliances which the model did not account for. The HOT
2000 model likely is not able to take into account these factors as modern appliances in a
household vary along with the electricity consumed by the different products.
The ventilation values generated in HOT 2000 were also significantly higher than what we had
expected given the hand calculations. The large difference between the ventilation rates results in
the HOT 2000 model significantly increasing the amount of energy used for heating up the air.
For example when we attempted to match the modeled data with our calculated data by
improving the air tightness of the house we saw that the percentage of energy use changed from

When modeling the house in HOT 2000, the team put as much details into the model that was
possible based on the set options, in order to model the house as accurately as possible. Many of
these values were determined from the house plans such as the house area, window sizes,
orientation, and others such values. Inputs between known values and modeled values differed
with respects such as the R values for windows and ventilation. The reasoning behind this was
due to the software automatically assigning R values for the windows based on code standards
for the give window dimensions. The program also had set values for the slab R values based on
set program choices which created a discrepancy between the model and our calculation. In the
table below we have noted the differences in R values between the model calculations and our
calculations.
Table 2. Model R values compared to calculation R values
Component Model R Calculation R
Sliding Door 1.13 2.1
Bay Window 1.34 2.1
Typical Window 1.1 2.1
Basement 1.96
Calculated
Separately

Table 3. Represents a break down component usage generated by HOT 2000
Component Annual Use (MJ) Percent of Total
Heating 235,003.67 79%
Cooling 8,924.19 3%
Hot Water 23,797.84 8%
Lights 5,949.46 2%
Other Electric 8,924.19 3%
Appliances 11,898.92 4%
Exterior Electric 5,949.46 2%
Total 297,473.00 100%

Figure 1. Shows a pie chart representing the components of the Annual Heat Loss generated by
HOT 2000

Figure 2. Shows the annual heating loss by section generated from the hand calculations

As we can see when comparing the two charts we notice that where the heat is being lost based
on our calculations and the program are not the same. For the model the heat loss though air
infiltration was a lower value that the calculated values, this could be based on the way the
ventilation component was calculated by taking different assumptions. The walls and basement
components for the two models produced appear to provide different results. In the HOT 2000
model the walls were taken to be much higher heat loss and the slab much lower heat loss.
However, these results may actually be fairly similar as we found out later that our assumption
for the heat loss through the slab was too high.
3%
8%
5%
1%
1%
42%
9%
2%
3%
26%
COMPONENTS OF ANNUAL HEAT LOSS
Wall Section Below Grade
Wall Section Above Grade
Wall Section Main Floor
Wall Section Second Floor
Floor Section Roof
Floor Section Slab on Grade Family Room
Windows R value 2.1
Air Infiltration Volume
Civ 516 Sustainable
Buildings

S h u l i a n g S u n 9 9 6 0 0 7 4 4 0
P a u l F u r b a c h e r 9 9 5 9 4 0 1 0 2
B r e t t S a g e r t 9 9 7 2 3 3 8 4 5

Tutorial #4
Retrofit

Abstract
Through employing various techniques and utilizing different materials the team was able to
significantly bring down the energy consumption of the house in total quality and energy per unit
area. The retrofit was divided into two phases. Phase 1 concerned all building envelope related
retrofit measures. This included insulation, windows, and doors. Phase 2 concerned appliances
and machine related retrofit measures. The results according to HOT2000 simulation were
promising as the energy consumption after retrofit was decreased significantly. The energy
usage per unit area decreased from 301 ekwh/(m^2) before retrofit to 144.4 ekwh/(m^2). Which
ammounts to savings of 156 ewh/m^2.
Methods
Table 1. Phase 1 Evelope retrofit
Insulation
Foundation Main Floor wall Second Floor
-Insulate floor with 3 XPS R9
-Insulate wall with 4 XP R16
-Insulate wall with 2 XPS R9
-Repace 1 air gap in wall
section with R5 spray
-Unchanged
Window upgrades
Replace with double glazed 13mm argon fill
Air tightness
Reseal doors and install operatable seals to Chimney

Table 2. Phase 2 Appliance and machinery retrofit
Retrofit Savings
Condensing dhw with drain recovery 30%-42%
Replacing incandescent light culbs with LED 100W => 12W/bulb
Replace main stove ~5%

Alternative(s) Considered
Aside from the energy saving measures the group proposed other energy saving alternatives were
considered but were rejected due to insignificant impact, financial concerns, and practicality.
Table 3. Alternatives
Benefit Reason for rejection
Phantom Load Reduce the phantom load by
unplugging appliance when
not in use.
Study shows apppliances
such as desktop computer,
micro-wave, and Television
consume between 0.8W 2.6
W of phaton load [1].
Exterior Insulation of
basement wall
Increase R value of Basement Expensive, would need to
excavate around basement.
Nested Thermal Envelope Adds layers of insulation and
allows one part of buliding to
be heated at one time
Inpractical for house as the
bedrooms are located in
basement, and second floor.

Results
The results from HOT2000 show a significant reduction in energy consumption before and after
retrofit. Below is a table showing total Base Consumption(before) and Projected
Consumption(after).
Table 4. Saving in energy consumption (Before vs. After)
Energy (GJ)
Energy
(ekWh/m2)
Base Consumption
(before) 274.2 301.1
Total Savings 142.7 156.7
Projected
Consumption (after) 131.5 144.4

Table 5. Phase 1 energy savings
Component
Phase 1
Annual Energy Savings
(GJ)
Savings
(ekWh/m2)
Foundation Insulation 56.1 61.6
301
144
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Base
Upgraded
Total Energy Consumption
Projections (ekWh/m2)
Main floor Wall
Insulation 32.5 35.7
Window Upgrades 4.6 5.1
Air Tightness 38.9 42.7
Phase 1 Total Savings 132.1 145.0
Projected Heating
Load 68.6 75

Table 6. Phase 2 energy savings
Phase 2
Component Annual Energy Savings (GJ) Savings (ekWh/m2)
Domestic Hot Water 8.5 9.3
LED Lighting 1.6 1.8
Stove Upgrade 0.5 0.5
Total Savings 10.6 11.6
Projected Loads 60.1 66.0

Graph 1. Break down of savings by component

Air Tightness,
24.7%
Foundation
Insulation, 39.3%
Wall
Insulation,
22.8%
Window
Upgrades, 3.2%
Domestic Hot Water,
6.0%
LED Lighting, 1.1%
Stove Upgrade, 0.4%
Savings by Component
Air Tightness
Foundation Insulation
Wall Insulation
Window Upgrades
Domestic Hot Water
LED Lighting
Stove Upgrade

Discussion
Overall the retrofit can be considered successful according to the simulation run by HOT 2000.
The energy intensity of the house decreased 52% from over 301kwh/m^2(before) to 144 kwh/m^2
(after). Phase 1 had the biggest impact on the retrofit project.
From graph 1 it shows that building envelope retrofits accounts for 90 percent of total savings
while phase 2 retrofit accounts for the other 10 percent. The reasons for the discrepancy are that
phase 1 retrofits are larger in volume and energy consumption compared to phase 2 retrofits
consisting of appliances and machinery. In particular insulating the foundation had the biggest
impact (39%) on savings. The reason for this is the foundation was a 4 slab on grade which
offered very poor insulating values R=0.32 [2]. After retrofit the R value increased significantly
(R=9.32) to cut down on heat loss from the basement.
The air tightness accounts for the second biggest saving component (24.7%) as the ACH
decreased from 10 to 3. This means the natural gas burner will spend less energy providing heat
to raise the air temperature which is in circulation.
Next the team may seek to implement some of the retrofits and examine the effects it has on the
energy consumption of the house.

Reference:
1. E. Dawson, J. Potter, and S. Meier. Are Phantom Loads Haunting your Energy Bill?.
Department of Architecture, University of Oregon.
2. S.Sun, B. Sargent, P. Furbacher. Energy Audit & Retrofit Feasibility Tutorial 1. Feb
01, 2013. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto

Civ 516 Sustainable
Buildings

P a u l F u r b a c h e r 9 9 5 9 4 0 1 0 2
B r e t t S a g e r t 9 9 7 2 3 3 8 4 5
S h u l i a n g S u n 9 9 6 0 0 7 4 4 0

Tutorial #5
Financial Review and Energy Retrofit

Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Retrofit Program Summary ........................................................................................................................... 3
Applicable Incentives .................................................................................................................................... 7
Technical Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 8
Building Envelope ...................................................................................................................................... 8
Foundation Insulation ........................................................................................................................... 8
Exterior Insulation ................................................................................................................................. 8
Windows ............................................................................................................................................... 8
Water Conservation .................................................................................................................................. 9
High Efficiency Flush Toilet ................................................................................................................... 9
Showerhead .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Washer .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Electrical Systems .................................................................................................................................... 10
Lighting ................................................................................................................................................ 10
Mechanical Systems ................................................................................................................................ 10
Domestic Hot Water ........................................................................................................................... 10
Stove ................................................................................................................................................... 10
References .................................................................................................................................................. 12
Appendix 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 14

Executive Summary
Over the course of this project we have analyzed the potential retrofit feasibility of a
house located in the East York region of Toronto. The house was originally built in 1948 as a
single dwelling bungalow but has had several upgrades and additions since then, mainly the
addition of the second floor. Currently the building has poor insulation levels in the basements
floors as well as the main floor walls and basement walls. We aim to fix this major problem as
well as upgrade other aspects of the house in the process.
Using the modeling program Hot2000 we were able to calculate the initial base load of
the house. From this point we proposed several retrofits that would bring the annual gross space
heating load down to 75 ekWh/m
2
and the total house consumption as close to 100 ekWh/m
2
as
possible. By introducing retrofits to the buildings envelope as well as the mechanical and
electrical systems we were able to bring the houses consumption down to an annual total of 144
ekWh/m
2
. Although this total is higher than we were hoping to achieve, the reduction in
building consumption was reduced by more than half of the base load consumption.
Another goal for this retrofit project was to then analyze the retrofits from a cost basis
and determine if the payback of the overall retrofits was feasible within a 20 year time span. In
order to properly asses this aspect of the project we had to account for interest rates on a loan
required for funding the project as well as an incremental inflation rate on the utilities. Based on
the energy model calculations as well as costs for the retrofits we came to the conclusion that the
project renovation would be paid off in 20 years.
Our final annual consumption was 144.4 ekWh/m
2
as we were able to successfully
implement all of the proposed retrofits. After the 20 year time period we were able to completely
pay off the $42,000 loan and make $19,100 as a total profit for the project.
Retrofit Program Summary
For this project, the baseline calculations were probably the most important step to
complete as all of the information regarding the retrofits was given in terms of energy saved. If
the energy that was being saved was not a significant amount then the pay back times for the
project would be larger than the 20 year expected payback. Figures 1 and 2 represent the amount
of energy consumed by the house in a given year and how it breaks down by each section. We
felt it important to break the heating down into the building envelope as this was the largest
section for retrofits in the house and held the largest losses.

Figure 1 Annual Baseline Break Down of Energy Consumption 301.1 ekWh/m
2

Figure 2 Annual Baseline Heating Break Down of Energy Consumption 213.8 ekWh/m
2

Once we determined the retrofits that we wanted to implement into the project we created
another model using the Hot2000 program that encompassed all of the retrofits. When comparing
the baseline model with the upgraded model we are able to see the potential savings of having
upgraded the house. Figure 3 and 4 represent the components of the energy consumed for the
upgraded house.

Figure 3 Annual Upgraded Break Down of Energy Consumption 144.4 ekWh/m
2

Figure 4 Annual Upgraded Heating Break Down of Energy Consumption 67.9 ekWh/m
2
Figure 5 on the next page as used to represent the energy that can be saved when all of
the retrofits for the house are completed. The difference between the energy consumption in
Figure 1 and 3 is what was used to calculate the values for Figure 5.

Energy (GJ) Energy (ekWh/m2)
Base Consumption (Before) 274.2 301.1
Predicted Total Savings 142.7 156.7
Projected Consumption (After) 131.5 144.4

Figure 5 Savings in Energy Consumption
The amount of money that can be directly saved per year due to the difference in energy
consumption can be calculated when we split the energy consumed into the three different
energy sources. For this step we wanted to show the savings form the bills and how long it would
take to repay the loan if we were to implement all of the projects. Figure 6 below represents the
savings per year as well as the amount of money required to repay the loan of $42,000, for which
the capital calculations are given in Appendix 1. These calculations we done assuming that the
utility prices increased at 2% per year and the interest payable on the loan was 3% per year.
Figure 7 shows a simple graph showing the cash flow regarding the loan over the 20 year time
period. We also see that the entire retrofit project will take around 42 days to fully complete
based on 1 worker doing an 8 hour shift. Obviously the project duration can easily be reduced if
we were to introduce more workers.

301
144
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Base
Upgraded
Total Energy Consumption Projections
ekWh/m2

Annual
Reduction Units Loan

Electricity 5040 eKwh $42,000

Loan Repaid

NG 48500 eKwh

YES

Water 120 m3

Electricity Price Natural Gas Water Price

0.13 $/kWh 0.04 $/ekWh 2.62 $/m3

Year
Electricity
Savings NG Savings
Water
Savings Interest Repayment Loan Principal
1 $668.30 $1,978.80 $320.69 $(1,260.00) $1,707.79 $(40,292.21)
2 $681.67 $2,018.38 $327.10 $(1,208.77) $1,818.38 $(38,473.83)
3 $695.30 $2,058.74 $333.64 $(1,154.21) $1,933.48 $(36,540.35)
4 $709.21 $2,099.92 $340.32 $(1,096.21) $2,053.23 $(34,487.12)
5 $723.39 $2,141.92 $347.12 $(1,034.61) $2,177.82 $(32,309.30)
6 $737.86 $2,184.76 $354.07 $(969.28) $2,307.40 $(30,001.89)
7 $752.62 $2,228.45 $361.15 $(900.06) $2,442.16 $(27,559.73)
8 $767.67 $2,273.02 $368.37 $(826.79) $2,582.27 $(24,977.47)
9 $783.02 $2,318.48 $375.74 $(749.32) $2,727.92 $(22,249.55)
10 $798.69 $2,364.85 $383.25 $(667.49) $2,879.30 $(19,370.25)
11 $814.66 $2,412.15 $390.92 $(581.11) $3,036.61 $(16,333.63)
12 $830.95 $2,460.39 $398.74 $(490.01) $3,200.07 $(13,133.57)
13 $847.57 $2,509.60 $406.71 $(394.01) $3,369.87 $(9,763.70)
14 $864.52 $2,559.79 $414.84 $(292.91) $3,546.24 $(6,217.45)
15 $881.81 $2,610.98 $423.14 $(186.52) $3,729.41 $(2,488.04)
16 $899.45 $2,663.20 $431.60 $(74.64) $3,919.62 $1,431.58
17 $917.44 $2,716.47 $440.24 $42.95 $4,117.09 $5,548.67
18 $935.79 $2,770.80 $449.04 $166.46 $4,322.09 $9,870.75
19 $954.50 $2,826.21 $458.02 $296.12 $4,534.86 $14,405.62
20 $973.59 $2,882.74 $467.18 $432.17 $4,755.68 $19,161.30

Figure 6 Energy Savings per year and Loan Payback

Figure 7 Representative Graph of Loan Payback over 20 Year Period
Applicable Incentives
The retrofits proposed will produce a profit over a 20-year period, but may also be
eligible for incentive programs that can help to reduce the initial capital cost of upgrading. The
Ontario Power Authority is offering coupons (until April 28th, 2013) for $5 off ENERGY
STAR qualified general purpose and specialty LEDs, resulting in savings of $250 for our
house if utilized. Unfortunately, incentives such as the City of Toronto Sustainable Energy
Funds, ecoENERGY, ecoENERGY for renewable heat, and Enbridge Gas Distribution's
Incentives for Energy Retrofits are no longer being offered. However, as this project is profitable
from its energy cost savings alone, the lack of incentives has little effect on the clear economic
desirability of the retrofit.

$(40,000.00)
$(30,000.00)
$(20,000.00)
$(10,000.00)
$-
$10,000.00
$20,000.00
Capital
Technical Summary
Building Envelope
Foundation Insulation
The house foundation will be enhanced with XPS insulation installed on the interior wall
and slab surfaces. As the foundation accounts for a large percentage of the home's heat loss, 4" of
insulation will be added to the wall. 3" will be added to the floor slab to strike a balance between
insulation and headroom remaining in the basement after the retrofit. The recommended product
is Owens CorningFoamular F-150, which is available in many home improvement stores. The
XPS sections have tongue and groove edges, and will therefore be interlocked during
installation. Each section will be held in place by flush concrete anchor bolts and covered with
the homeowner's choice of wall and flooring material.
Exterior Insulation
The main floor wall will have 2" of XPS insulation added on to the exterior brick finish
to improve the overall wall performance. The upper story of the building is currently finished
with stucco, which will be extended down to the foundation level. When installing the stucco the
insulation will be used as the base (instead of normal Styrofoam), allowing the house to maintain
a uniform profile while dramatically improving wall performance. The same product used in the
basement will be used here, but in a different thickness.
Windows
The house's windows are reaching the end of their useful lifespan and have begun to
manifest signs of failure (i.e. condensation between panes). This presents an opportunity to
retrofit the entire building's windows, improving the performance of both the windows
themselves and their air seals. It is proposed that the windows be replaced with double glazed
argon filled units that, when installed properly, also provide minimal air leakage. The
recommended window replacement is the American Craftsman 70 double hung window, which
is readily available from home improvement stores. This retrofit is double-pronged in that it also
requires careful and competent installation to ensure proper window seals (a significant amount
of heat loss occurs by air infiltration, of which windows account for the vast majority).
Water Conservation
High Efficiency Flush Toilet (x3)
The Kohler Highline 2-piece 1.28 GPF high efficiency toilet provides savings of up to
16,500 gallons per year compared to the old 3.5 GPF toilets. The canister flush valve provides
consistent water volume and velocity for each flush, while the class five flushing technology
provides bulk waste flushing performance and good bowl cleanliness. It meets the flushing
performance requirements established by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Water Sense
program.
Showerhead (x2)
The new MOEN Banbury 5-Spray 4" showerhead 2.5 GPM replacing the old showerhead
with 4 GPM will reduce gallon of water usage per minute and overall water usage while
maintaining overall comfort. Since the shower is a frequently used item in the house (each
person uses a shower at least once/day), the water saved from a lower consumption show head is
significant (23,775 gallons /year).

Washer
The old washer will be replaced with a high efficiency E.S. LG Electronics Front Load
Washer. Front load washers offer significant savings compared to top loaders. The extra-large 4
cu. Ft capacity means fewer loads, saving time and energy. The washer was awarded 2012
ENERGY STAR most efficient designation.
Electrical Systems
Lighting (x50)

The Philips 22-Watt (100W) A21 LED light bulb uses significantly less energy while
providing the same amount of light when compared to traditional incandescent light bulbs.
These LED lights meet federal requirements for energy efficiency to qualify as ENERGY
STAR Rated, and are exceedingly simple to install.
Mechanical Systems
Domestic Hot Water
The existing induced fan natural gas heater will be replaced with a 95% efficiency
condensing model with drain heat recovery, resulting in significant energy savings. The models
recommended are the AO Smith GDHE-50-NG heater (50 gallon, 100,000 BTU) and the Power-
Pipe R3-30 DWHR unit. Installation is relatively straightforward, because vent piping is already
in place for the existing heater, and the heater is located in close proximity to the house water
drain.

Stove
Am electric stove is currently used for cooking, whereas a natural gas stove is both
cheaper and more efficient. Gas stoves use less energy than electric stoves overall because the
flame providing heat is more easily controlled and adjusted. This means when cooking the user
wastes less heat leading to less usage of energy. For the same amount of energy natural gas is
also cheaper than electricity. The Samsung NX583 offers efficiency plus a large oven, extensive
burners, and many useful features (self-cleaning, timed shut-off, etc.). This retrofit will require
the existing natural gas line to be extended up to the kitchen in place of the old 240V electric
line.

References

XPS found at
http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/catalog/servlet/Search?storeId=10051&langId=-
1&catalogId=10053&keyword=insulation+xps&Ns=None&Ntpr=1&Ntpc=1&selectedCatgry=S
earch+All

American Craftsman 70 found at
1&catalogId=10053&keyword=double+glazed%20argon%20windows&Ns=None&Ntpr=1&Ntp
c=1&selectedCatgry=Search+All

AO Smith GDHE-50-NG found at http://www.pexsupply.com/AO-Smith-GDHE-50-NG-50-
Gallon-100000-BTU-Vertex-100-Power-Direct-Vent-Residential-Gas-Water-Heater-Nat-Gas

Power-Pipe R3-30 found at http://www.homedepot.ca/product/power-pipe-r3-30-drain-water-
heat-recovery-unit/910916

Samsung NX583 found at
http://www.homedepot.com/p/t/203673098?catalogId=10053&langId=-
1&keyword=stove&storeId=10051&superSkuId=203669993&N=5yc1v&R=203673098

Philips 22-Watt (100W) A21 found at
http://www.canadiantire.ca/AST/browse/3/HouseHome/Lighting/CompactFluorescentBulbs.jsp

Kohler Highline 2-piece found at
1&catalogId=10053&keyword=toliet&Ns=None&Ntpr=1&Ntpc=1&selectedCatgry=Search+All

MOEN Banbury 5-Spray found at http://www.homedepot.ca/product/coralais-economy-single-
function-showerhead-in-polished-chrome/926433
E.S. LG Electronics Front Load Washer found at
http://www.calgary.ca/UEP/Water/Pages/Water-conservation/Indoor-water-conservation/Water-
Efficient-Fixtures-residential.aspx#

Appendix 1

Total Time Taken for Retrofit = 42 days based on an 8 hour day.

Retrofit
Material
Cost
Number
of hours
Labour
Cost
Material +
Labour Cost
Natural gas
Energy
Savings
(Kwh)
Electricity
Energy
Savings
(Kwh)
Water
Savings
(gallons)
Cost($)/
Saving
unit(kw
h/gal)
Building
Envelope XPS 3" 2760.00 97 7728.00 10584.60 15646 0.034
XPS 4" 477.50 17 1337.00 1831.21 9068 0.010
XPS 2" 191.00 7 534.80 732.48 9068 0.004

Double glazed
argon fill 2850.00 100 7980.00 10929.75 1295 0.422
Air tightening 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 10846 0.000
Mechanical Condensing Boiler 2000.00 70 5600.00 7670.00 2584 0.148

+ Drain heat
recovery 555 20 1554.00 2128.43
Gas stove (x1) 1100.00 6 480 1580.00 360 0.586
Electricity
Phillips LED
lighting (x50) 2750.00 0.00 0.00 2750.00 4680 0.029
Water
Kohler high EFF
flush toilet (x3) 534 6 480 1020.00 7992 0.006

Moen Banbury
showerhead (x2) 64 0 0 64.00 23775 0.0001

E.S. LG Electronics
Front Load
Washer (x1) 889 6 480 1369.00 33 6600 0.007
Totals 14170.5 329 26173.8 40344.3 48507 5073 38367

Sustainable Buildings Assignments

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainable Buildings Assignments

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Energy Audit &

which is a factor of 2 away from baseline of 70 kwh/

. However, by increasing the

increases and vice versa. With a warm and leaky

. This value is almost spot

. Therefore from the results a hypothesis could be

. From the visit to Pauls house the team

. Based on information gathered and sensitivity analysis performed it would seem

is a reasonable figure to conclude for the energy intensity of the house.

You might also like