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
| May 20, 2013
4 emerging trends in parking structure design
Survey of parking professionals reveals how technology is transforming the parking industry.
| May 20, 2013
Jones Lang LaSalle: All U.S. real estate sectors to post gains in 2013—even retail
With healthier job growth numbers and construction volumes at near-historic lows, real estate experts at Jones Lang LaSalle see a rosy year for U.S. commercial construction.
| May 17, 2013
First look: HKS' multipurpose stadium for Minnesota Vikings
The Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority (MSFA), the Minnesota Vikings and HKS Sports & Entertainment Group have unveiled the design of the State’s new multi? purpose stadium in Minneapolis, a major milestone in getting the $975 million stadium built on time and on budget.
| May 17, 2013
40 Under 40 winners: Meet the architects
Of the up-and-coming AEC professionals to be named 40 Under 40 winners by the editors of Building Design+Construction, 18 make their living in the architecture profession.
| May 17, 2013
5 things AEC pros need to know about low-e glass
Low-emissivity glasses are critical to making today’s buildings brighter, more energy-efficient, and more sustainable. Here are five tips to help AEC professionals understand the differences among low-e glasses and their impact on building performance.
| May 17, 2013
University labs double as K-12 learning environments
Increasingly, college and university research buildings are doing double duty as homes for K-12 STEM programs. Here’s how to create facilities that captivate budding scientists while keeping faculty happy.
| May 17, 2013
LEED v4 has provision to reduce water use in cooling towers
The next version of the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED rating system will expand water-savings targets to appliances, cooling towers, commercial kitchen equipment, and other areas.
| May 16, 2013
Chicago unveils $1.1 billion plan for DePaul arena, Navy Pier upgrades
Hoping to send a loud message that Chicago is serious about luring tourism and entertainment spending, Mayor Rahm Emanuel has released details of two initiatives that have been developing for more than a year and that it says will mean $1.1 billion in investment in the McCormick Place and Navy Pier areas.
| May 16, 2013
Michael R. Bohn named Executive VP at Gilbane
Gilbane has promoted Michael R. Bohn to executive vice president. With over 28 years of service to the company and leadership roles on such high-profile projects as the University of Michigan Biomedical Science Building and the University of Chicago Medical Center, Bohn will now have responsibility for Gilbane’s New York and Midwest business units.