-
A five-story, 140,925 square foot, wood-framed construction structure with individual HVAC systems, central water heating and common area support spaces, comprised of four stories of residential units and one story of commercial space over a parking garage
The technical team analyzed two packages: Electric Heating and Mixed Fuel Efficiency + Increased Solar Thermal. The focus was on residential units and common area spaces only and used two metrics: On-Bill and Long Term System Cost. Results revealed that analyses for both prototypes were cost-effective using the On-Bill metric for most Climate Zones (CZ) while the LSC metric analyses were cost-effective in all CZs. The final report will include analyses with current utility rates.
Multifamily Alterations
This analysis also used two prototypes:
-
Low-rise, two-story wood-framed garden style structure with eight dwelling units and individual HVAC and water heating systems
-
Mid-rise, five-story mixed use metal-framed structure with 88 dwelling units, individual HVAC systems and central water heating system
Efficiency and equipment measure packages were analyzed. Envelope efficiency measures (wall insulation, cool roof, ceiling insulation, air sealing) were considered along with duct sealing and solar PV measures. Equipment measures considered were heat pump space conditioning and heat pump water heating. Again, two metrics (On-Bill and Long Term System Cost) were used in the analyses.
The analyses of the efficiency measure packages revealed that for the low-rise prototype, cost effective measures included solar PV, wall insulation (blown in), duct sealing/insulation, air sealing and cool roof (0.25 ASR) measures. For the mid-rise prototype, cost-effective measures included solar PV, air sealing, wall insulation (blown in), window and cool roof (0.65/0.70 ASR) measures. Analyses for the equipment measures revealed that HPSH measures were cost-effective in all CZs except CZ15 for low-rise prototypes and in all CZs for mid-rise prototypes. For HPWH measures, low-rise cost-effectiveness for individual HPWH replacement was present in CZ12 On-Bill only while mid-rise analyses of central HPWH replacement was found to be cost-effective in all CZs.
Webinar materials, both the complete presentation and recording, are available here. The full cost effectiveness study reports will be available in Q3. The Cost Effectiveness Explorer team is currently incorporating these analyses into the tool and anticipate this will be available later this summer.