\"Just what, not why.\"

Bob D._2

I'm pretty simple, but I've never heard of anyone "passing" an energy audit. I hope it was a freebie, because it sounds like that's what its worth. Sounds like you've done another really good job of "customer satisfaction".

Darrell_4

Passing the Energy Audit

Been working with a long standing customer of mine who is getting ready to sell her home and downsize abit. 26 years ago I installed a WMC VHE there and have been back every year to service it. It was originally coupled with a WH-7 that eventually pinholed, (after 24 years), and was replaced two years ago with a triangle tube indirect. Baseboard throughout the house controlled with Taco 571’s. Pretty simple system, been very reliable, and fairly inexpensive for her. In 26 years I can’t remember any call outs, but I have made some mods; converted to HSI, changed the plexivent to SS, changed the funky o-rings connections on the heat exchanger end to bronze unions, added TACO ZVC controller with ODR/WWSD card. Other than that, just routine repairs and some preemptive replacements of the blower, etc. The brochure claims 87% efficiency, and this one consistently tests higher than that by a point or two.

Because it is over twenty years old, the energy audit won’t recognize it. In fact, she can replace it with a less efficient boiler and pass the audit. The auditor cannot manually input the real world facts, he can only select from the menu and has to accept the values given. Because it cannot pass the audit, she cannot get financing and will have to change it out. When I checked with the Auditor, there is no room for thinking…this is the program, period. Apparently the program only recognizes boilers under twenty years old, and nothing that has open burners. It won’t recognize open burners “because they are inherently unsafe and present a high level of carbon monoxide danger.”

I just checked, 68% of the CO calls I went on for the fire department this year had sealed combustion boilers or furnaces less than 10 years old. In a large percentage of them the equipment had quit and they were heating with the oven or worse while waiting on parts…often for days. In the rest of them, the CO culprit was the clothes dryer. In over 60% of the cases, the HRV was drawing the exhaust plume back into the residence and that was determined to be the problem.

As Paul Harvey used to say…”Just what, not why.”

Rocky

Darrell,

the audit program is so biased. The inspectors really don't know about heating systems, operational efficiency versus AFUE etc. They have a computer program they go by. If its not on the computer software, then it don't count. I've found inspectors who go strictly by the manufacturer's printed AFUE to determine "energy upgrade" points, while others will go by a printed combustion test result: but we both know you can make the result read anything you want to achieve whatever efficiency you want, if the inspector knows nothing about the co2, smoke, temp etc. But what do you do? The customer is wanting to upgrade to a newer system, and granted, what is available today is a little more efficient than what was produced 20 years ago. the State of Alaska is giving them money to do it so they see an opportunity to have the State kick in about $4,500 towards upgrading an older boiler. Do I tell them no? Nope! I give them a more efficient boiler, with other upgrades to further enhance their operational efficiency. What they end up with is better than what they had, even if what they had was still pretty good. You can't fight the beauracrats or make them instant heating guru's. Find a way to work within the system. This energy audit accounted for about 40 boilers alone for our company last year, and we are on track for at least that many this year. I just do my best to satisfy the customer's demands, "clean-up" all the other stuff, and leave them with a better system. Is it a perfect program? Nope, but I have also been able to remove some real crummy systems and save the customers a GOB of money that otherwise would not have happened without this program.
You just do your best,
Rocky

Darrell_4

\"Passing\"

By "pass" I mean that the structure must attain a certain level of efficiency as determined by the energy auditor, or she is penalized, or rejected, for financing.

It is simple...it is wrong...but simple.

Darrell_4

I know...settle down and cash the checks.

I guess my problem is that I have a lifetime of experience and training and it gets thrown out by some auditor who took a week end class.

Darrell_4

Not a local

And for the local auditors that read this and think I'm talking about you...this particular auditor came down from Anchorage for the weekend.

bill_105

Shocked people!

I had a guy complain to me that he found out the funds coming from the state were taxable income. He felt betrayed.

Darrell_4

I'm getting calls daily about that. Folks are having new equipment put in on the promise of rebates...and then find out that the rebate is not as big as they were told, because the rebates isn't set until the work is done. Lots of complaints about equipment that isn't as efficient as they were promised. Lots of complaints about systems that don't work.