There are many hurdles to overcome when completing a life cycle cost assessment. LCCAs have been praised by some and criticized or viewed with skepticism by others. Some AEC professionals like to use LCCAs to provide evidence that a certain design with a higher first cost attached to it actually achieves lower total cost of ownership over time.
Such an analysis, however, is only as good as the data that is used to complete it; in the end, you have to be able to justify and defend your results. When completing an LCCA, it is important to remain neutral and to use unbiased data.
Following are some words of advice regarding LCCAs, based on RMF Engineering’s experience on the Berkeley County School District HVAC study.
1. AVOID USING A “SIMPLE PAYBACK” METHODOLOGY. As the name implies, simple payback is a rudimentary methodology, and the results can be unsophisticated and even misleading. This method should not be used as an in-depth LCCA tool.
2. DON’T HIDE YOUR ASSUMPTIONS. The paucity of data on certain costs means that you will have to make assumptions, but these should not be allowed to affect the outcome of the analysis. It is important to thoroughly document all assumptions, costs, and calculations used in the analysis.
3. GET YOUR CONSTRUCTION DATA FROM THE BEST AVAILABLE SOURCES. Not many contractors and sales representatives are willing to divulge their actual cost for equipment, materials, and installation. Usually the best they will give you is the cost in dollars per square foot, which, unfortunately, is not sufficiently detailed to provide a proper analysis.
For HVAC life cycle cost analyses, manufacturers will often provide budget pricing for specific pieces of equipment, which can be useful. Resources such as RSMeans and published pricing guides for piping and other materials are also great resources for calculating cost and should be used instead of general cost.
4. MAKE THE EFFORT TO GET SOLID MAINTENANCE DATA. It is important to have a clear understanding of how an HVAC system will be maintained as well as how much it will cost the owner to maintain. Some owners prefer to do their own maintenance; others contract maintenance out. Some perform maintenance at regularly scheduled intervals; others wait until the equipment breaks down. Maintenance is probably the most poorly documented cost item in most LCCAs, but it can have a major impact on the accuracy and validity of the analysis. Make sure your maintenance data is up to date and specific to your project.
5. NAIL DOWN THE OWNER’S EXPERIENCE WITH EQUIPMENT LIFE. The life cycle of equipment varies by owner and can be drastically different than the manufacturer’s reported data. When comparing different types of systems, it’s important to discuss the owner’s experience with equipment life and how long they plan to use certain products. Any sharp differentiation from the norm could have a significant impact on the outcome of your analysis.
6. ANALYZE THE RESULTS CAREFULLY TO DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF CERTAINTY. For the BCSD project, the difference between the least expensive and next least expensive system was significant (13.1%), so we were comfortable in recommending it. Unfortunately, not every LCCA results in a clear winner. Each analysis will have a different level of uncertainty associated with it due to the assumptions, variables, and the analysis type. The more variables and assumptions there are, the higher the level of uncertainty. There are often intangibles that cannot be associated with a quantifiable cost, and one of these might end up becoming the deciding factor in your analysis.
7. LOOK FOR LCCA FUNDING FROM NON-CLIENT SOURCES. For the Berkeley County SD project the local utility cooperative, which happens to place a great deal of value on customer education, offered to partially fund the study in order to have access to the data. When proposing an LCCA to a client, check around to see who else could benefit from the analysis. There may be funding available to offset the cost to the owner or provide additional funding for a more in-depth study.
8. EXPECT THE UNEXPECTED. For our project, we originally modeled gas boilers for the water-source heat pump system to be similar to the four-pipe system. The energy models showed that there was virtually no requirement for heating of the condenser water loop due to our building type and climate. We suspected this might be the case because a nearby high school had been operating without a boiler and did not have heating problems. It was later decided that an electric boiler would be a better fit for the school district’s HVAC systems because its initial cost and associated annual maintenance costs would be far less than a gas boiler. It’s likely that you will face similar unanticipated results in future projects, so be prepared.
Related Stories
Reconstruction & Renovation | Mar 28, 2022
Is your firm a reconstruction sector giant?
Is your firm active in the U.S. building reconstruction, renovation, historic preservation, and adaptive reuse markets? We invite you to participate in BD+C's inaugural Reconstruction Market Research Report.
Legislation | Mar 28, 2022
LEED Platinum office tower faces millions in fines due to New York’s Local Law 97
One Bryant Park, also known as the Bank of America Tower, in Manhattan faces an estimated $2.4 million in annual fines when New York City’s York’s Local Law 97 goes into effect.
Healthcare Facilities | Mar 25, 2022
Health group converts bank building to drive-thru clinic
Edward-Elmhurst Health and JTS Architects had to get creative when turning an American Chartered Bank into a drive-thru clinic for outpatient testing and vaccinations.
Higher Education | Mar 24, 2022
Higher education sector sees 19 percent reduction in facilities investments
Colleges and universities face a growing backlog of capital needs and funding shortfalls, according to Gordian’s 2022 State of Facilities in Higher Education report.
Architects | Mar 16, 2022
James Hoban: Designer and builder of the White House
Stewart D. McLaurin, President of the White House Historical Association, chats with BD+C Executive Editor Robert Cassidy about James Hoban, the Irish draftsman and builder who convinced George Washington to let him design and build the White House.
Architects | Mar 16, 2022
Diébédo Francis Kéré named 2022 Pritzker Architecture Prize recipient
Diébédo Francis Kéré, architect, educator and social activist, has been selected as the 2022 Laureate of the Pritzker Architecture Prize, announced Tom Pritzker, Chairman of The Hyatt Foundation, which sponsors the award that is regarded internationally as architecture’s highest honor.
Architects | Mar 10, 2022
Gyo Obata, FAIA, HOK Founding Partner, passes away at 99
Obata's career spanned six decades and included iconic projects like the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., and Community of Christ Temple in Independence, Mo.
AEC Tech Innovation | Mar 9, 2022
Meet Emerge: WSP USA's new AEC tech incubator
Pooja Jain, WSP’s VP-Strategic Innovation, discusses the pilot programs her firm’s new incubator, Emerge, has initiated with four tech startup companies. Jain speaks with BD+C's John Caulfield about the four AEC tech firms to join Cohort 1 of the firm’s incubator.
Architects | Mar 2, 2022
FGM Architects and LeMay Erickson Willcox Architects join forces
FGM Architects announced that LeMay Erickson Wilcox Architects, a 19-person architectural studio based in Reston, VA is joining their firm.
Architects | Mar 1, 2022
Alyson Steele Elected President and CEO of Quinn Evans
(2.25.22) Alyson Steele, FAIA, LEED AP, has been elected president and chief executive officer of Quinn Evans, a nationally recognized firm providing architecture, planning, interior design, landscape architecture, and historic preservation services. Steele has been with the firm since 1997 and previously served as executive vice president and chief design officer. She succeeds Larry Barr, FAIA, who will continue to serve on the board of directors.