Sustainable Renewal Planning Inc.
The Building Portfolio Assessment:
One of the essential data cornerstones required to determine
long-term TCBO is a current condition evaluation of the
components. Whether a client gathers
mation through existing internal processes, or uses one of the many
well-recognized evaluation tools, the SEEFAR(c) analysis is able to incorporate
the relevant data when comparing the TCBO for various capital investment options. This data is needed to support the facility renewal prioritization of building components that have reached, or exceeded, their useful life cycle.
Concomitant Energy Savings Profiles:
The SEEFAR(c) analysis does not replace the need for a thorough assessment of the engineering, energy savings, and maintenance aspects of potential measures. While all the normal best practices are still required, the SEEFAR(c) analysis will translate energy savings data into a concomitant energy savings profile which captures the useful energy savings lifecycle of each individual measure. This ensures that the time frame over which energy savings are used to support capital investment is limited to the useful lifecycle. Once the energy savings data is packaged, the user can easily examine the impact of both scope grouping and implementation timing.
Maintenance Repair and Operations Data:
Calculating the TCBO requires a careful analysis of costs that the organization needs to plan for, over time, on each of these cost factors. Since each unique set of measures will produce an equally unique set of lifecycle costs in its area, the data from this analysis will need to be collected separately, and the results imported into the SEEFAR(c) analysis. This acquired data often adds significant value to the measures selection process, because it adds clarity to the gap between lowest-first-cost, and lifecycle cost.
Creating the TCBO Analysis Model:
The SEFFAR(c) analysis is designed to provide clarity to the projected TCBO for both existing and new facilities. While the underlying comparison for existing facilities is the gap between the status quo and the renewal alternatives, the underlying comparison for new facilities is made between alternatives. The SEEFAR(c) analysis builds a model that blends the investment impact of energy and operational savings, implementation timetables, liabilities related to deferred investment, energy cost escalation rates, capital cost escalation rates, and cash flow discount rates. This approach allows users to conduct sensitivity analysis on variable factors such as (a) energy costs, (b) capital costs, (c) discount rates, (d) technology risk, and (e) savings revenue streams.
Exploring the Capital Investment Scenarios:
Once the required data has been entered into the SEEFAR(c) workbook and audited, the user can then vary the scope of concomitant energy savings, vary the implementation timetable for the various measures, and explore alternatives related to other factors that will reflect the total investment impact. This scenario exercise will help to identify the risk levels identified in the sensitivity analysis, provide clarity in selecting the scope and timetable for implementation, and identify the ideal capital investment requirements needed to manage the TCBO.