Category Archives: Global

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Energy-Saving Metal Buildings

Building owners, facility managers, and leaseholders are facing tougher challenges every day. Energy conservation, reduction of carbon emissions, and returns on investment are no longer the problems of the future. They are here now, and everyone is asking, “How can I make my metal building work for me and/or my tenants?”

The first question should be: “What metal building component has the highest and fastest return on investment?” One answer is fiberglass metal building insulation (MBI). While fiberglass MBI has never been the favorite building component on the material list, it is quickly being brought back into the spotlight as a less costly and more efficient way to reduce energy cost, qualify for tax deductions, reduce carbon emissions, improve attractiveness to tenants, and increase comfort, noise absorption, and the building’s life span, value, etc. The benefits are endless, and the energy-saving phenomenon is spreading throughout the nation, with the greatest benefit of all being the return on investment. Installing fiberglass MBI provides direct monetary benefits such as those below.

Energy Cost Reductions

Creating an energy-efficient work space is proving to be a superior benefit to leaseholders or renters. As more and more vacant buildings become available, building owners are looking for new ways to attract tenants.

The logic is simple: not running the air conditioner/heater all day will cut back on energy costs. Installing fiberglass MBI in metal buildings, whether in a new building or when retrofitting an existing building, dramatically reduces the amount of energy needed to either heat or cool a metal building. Certified fiberglass MBI provides an extremely cost-efficient method of reducing the thermal transfer of heat through the walls and roof of a metal building, while simultaneously protecting against condensation build-up on the panels.

Tax Deductions

The monetary benefits of fiberglass MBI don’t end with the tenants—tax credits are readily available for building owners.

While new buildings benefit the most because they are easily insulated with a double layer system, retrofitting an existing building is becoming widely popular as an energy-conserving investment. Buildings with existing insulation or buildings without insulation are taking advantage of not only reduced energy bills but also the added tax benefits associated with adding certified fiberglass MBI.

Commercial building owners or leaseholders can qualify for a tax deduction of as much as $1.80 per square foot if 50 percent in energy savings is achieved. Fifty percent may seem tough, but there is also a $.60 per square foot tax credit if 16 2/3 percent in energy savings can be achieved. This tax credit has been extended through December 31, 2013.

To claim a tax deduction, the building owner must obtain a certification proving the building’s energy savings will be reached. There are programs that can assist in providing compliance for building envelopes. The National Institute of Building Sciences has a website called the Mechanical Insulation Design Guide, which provides a wealth of knowledge and several types of simple calculators.

Certified Fiberglass Insulation

Is there a difference in metal building fiberglass insulation? Yes! Not all fiberglass insulation is made the same, but third-party organizations such as the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association (NAIMA) and the National Insulation Association (NIA) ensure the materials manufactured are certified through the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). These are the only fiberglass insulations recommended for metal buildings.

When qualifying for a tax credit, the last thing you want is to discover the non-certified insulation purchased did not recover to the stated R-value when delivered to the jobsite prior to installation. The smart choice is to use fiberglass insulation products certified by NAIMA and/or NIA through NAHB.

Conclusion

Whether in the roof or walls or on ducts and pipes, insulation offers one of the best returns on investment of any energy-efficiency technology. Don’t overlook it as you think about how your building can work better for you!

A version of this article originally appeared in the November/December 2009 issue of Metal Building Developer.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Building the Future: Recommendations from the NIBS Consultative Council

In its 2010 Annual Report to the President of the United States, the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) addressed several high-level issues currently impacting the building community and offered findings and recommendations related to these issues. The National Insulation Association currently serves as the vice-chair of the NIBS Consultative Council, which represents leading organizations within the building community.

Among the topics identified for study by the Consultative Council are several areas of importance to the mechanical insulation industry. The following are excerpts from the NIBS 2010 Annual Report; the full report is available at www.nibs.org/client/assets/files/nibs/2010_AnnualReport.pdf.

Defining High Performance and Common Metrics

Although the building practices and structures of the past have tended to optimize the pieces and parts of the building process and product, the result has been a less-than-optimized whole building. Alternatively, the current high-performance building initiative looks first to optimize the whole building and then to major systems on down to the parts and pieces. Whole building standards and measures are crucial to this initiative.

For standards and measures to be meaningful to anyone, they must be capable of being uniformly measured, expressed, and understood by all users. The first step must be the establishment of consensus standards and measures for performance. The second step is the implementation of standards at the project-specific level.

To ensure standards uniformity and aggregated building optimization, the Institute’s High Performance Building Council should convene a Standards Integration Group (SIG) to coordinate the work of attribute-focused Standards Development Organizations (SDOs). When owners/developers choose to pursue high-performance goals, they should take the opportunity to adopt an SIG family of SDO standards.

SDOs should develop standards based on the identified attributes (energy, environment, safety, security, etc.) to achieve high-performance legitimacy. These standards can be used to help assess to what degree a building is considered a high-performance building.

The following metrics can be used to help measure the actual performance of a building against the standards. Attribute Groups are encouraged to discuss how such measures can be defined for a particular attribute.

  • Baseline: a measure of standard performance for specific whole building and major systems when the measure is cost, or for a particular unit of measure for critical components. Standard performance and productivity relates to the market or industry average, based on conventional or customary means and methods at a particular baseline year.
  • Benchmark: a measure of in-progress high performance according to a viably optimized state. In many cases, this measure is derived as an interpolation between the baseline and an end goal. Also, in most cases, a target performance value should be determined as well.
  • Measured Results: a measure of actual results from the completed and operating building.
  • Performance Results Index (PRI): a ratio of component measures, where the numerator is the measured result and the denominator is the standard it is measured against.

A high-performance building exists once the measured results meet or improve upon the benchmark measures, or when the Baseline PRI is 1.0 or less.

The complex nature of the building process and facility operations requires a hierarchical structure, starting with whole-building high performance; then drilling down from the whole building to major systems, sub-systems, components, materials, etc., as well as concepts; and concurrently drilling across to address each attribute. The intersection of each item and attribute would create a “destination” to define relative performance in terms of the metric used, how it is measured, and how it is expressed.

Each intersection would be measured and expressed in two ways: (1) the Cost Benefit and (2) the High Performance (HP) Classification of: (a) Fails HP, (b) Meets HP, or (c) Exceeds HP. Individual building components and sub-components may include these cost and classification measures, but overall building performance would be evaluated according to units of measure relating to energy, carbon, light, sound, force, load, etc., as determined by the respective SDOs.

In order to accomplish these recommendations, the Consultative Council proposes a four-step process:

  1. The Institute’s High Performance Building Council would form a Leadership Council representing all stakeholders (owners; building producers; codes, standards, measures, and industry improvement organizations; and government agencies).
  2. The Leadership Council would convene a brainstorming session with a broad base of stakeholder volunteers.
  3. The Leadership Council would compile the brainstorming results, produce a roadmap for implementation, and promote it throughout the marketplace and to policy-making groups. The outcome should address the formation of the various SDO Attribute Groups and SIG, as well as identification of needed research and development projects.
  4. The building community would then implement the roadmap.

Recommendations:

  • The Institute’s High Performance Building Council should form a Standards Integration Group to identify gaps in information where additional work is needed and coordinate consensus standards and measures development throughout the industry.
  • Standards Development Organizations should develop standards that address attributes of a high-performance building as identified by the SIG’s gap analysis. Where practical, SDOs are encouraged to engage in Attribute Groups to discuss the establishment and use of common metrics.
  • Owner and project delivery (production) teams should implement a high-performance building system that measures both the project and completed facility metrics according to the standards of accredited SDOs.

Energy and Water Efficiency

Conveying water consumes energy—from the source to the point of treatment, through the treatment process, while distributing water to the point of use, heating water during use, and going through the wastewater treatment process. Plumbing distribution systems within buildings need to be designed with a greater focus on water and energy efficiency in residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. During the design phase, designers should minimize the distance between the sources of hot water (generally the water heater) and the various points of use within a building. The use of on-demand or timer-controlled hot water circulation systems and increased use of pipe insulation materials on hot water lines will greatly improve both water and energy efficiency levels within the building.

The United States has a profound need to improve the indoor and outdoor use of water in buildings. The EPA reports that 36 states expect to experience local, regional, or statewide water shortages by 2013.1 The nation employs a very conservative approach of using potable water for nearly all applications, which may not be sustainable in an era of constrained supplies. Before additional improvements in indoor water efficiency can be confidently utilized, research on plumbing-related issues is required to better understand the implications of reduced flows in building supply and drainage pipes.

Recommendations:

  • The federal government should redouble its leadership efforts and urgently work with construction community stakeholders to develop widely acceptable energy and water efficiency metrics to be deployed in developing future codes, standards, and efficiency programs.
  • The federal government should provide monetary incentives in the form of funding and tax incentives for the adoption and enforcement of energy and water efficiency stretch/above-baseline codes and standards.
  • The building community and policymakers should shift toward performance-based code provisions that work toward net-zero energy buildings and away from prescriptive requirements.

Codes and Standards
Adoption and Enforcement

Increasing code stringency provides new challenges to the building industry at large and to state and local agencies that are charged with administering and enforcing the codes. The success of the building and construction market to meet code requirements relies on the availability and pricing of products and equipment. Equally important are the appropriate knowledge and skills of designers and contractors. Yet product development and workforce training takes time, which may not be considered when adopting updated codes and standards. Although many in the construction community are aware when code changes are going into effect, they often are reluctant to support code compliance or embrace the changes.

The recent increase in development of stretch/above-baseline codes provides a straightforward potential solution. If these codes were to automatically become the next minimum code, they would provide the predictability and experience needed to support significant code compliance. Once established, incentive programs also could be used to promote the stretch code as a voluntary performance level for construction. Training, resources, and financial incentives would work to fuel product development, skills, and experience that would carry over to the broader market once the requirements became mandatory.

Resource constraints also tend to dampen the adoption of new codes. Some state policymakers are averse to adopting a code that will require significant and costly support. As codes advance further and faster, more resources will need to be invested to help the industry keep up. If resources are not available, code adoptions may stall.

An outcome-based objective that can be readily verified can assist jurisdictions in solving this problem. For instance, where code compliance is not achieved on an annual basis, penalties in the form of utility surcharges or property tax fines can be imposed. These outcome-based objectives may be more effective in the long run than the present situation, where buildings receive a certificate of occupancy upon completion, with limited or no inspections thereafter (depending upon the occupancy).

It is important for all stakeholders to know when a new code is expected to be implemented and to understand its requirements. Many states or jurisdictions start this education process months in advance of the code change and/or allow a window of compliance (e.g., permits can be issued for two different editions of the code during a specified grace period). Effective outreach, education, and training greatly enhance acceptance and use of the new code.

Recommendations:

  • Policymakers and the public often misunderstand the codes and standards development, adoption, and compliance process due to its complexities. There need to be education initiatives to improve understanding.
  • Increasing the participation of federal, state, and local government agencies in the development of codes and standards would yield more uniformity and more consistently adopted and understood codes, thereby increasing the effectiveness of model building codes.

Sustainability

Sustainable buildings and related infrastructure advance economic growth, environmental stewardship, and social progress. They also are resilient to the effects of natural, accidental, and willful hazards. Achieving a sustainable built environment requires numerous approaches.

Recommendations:

  • Economic growth, environmental stewardship, and social progress form the “triple bottom line” for sustainability that should be addressed in all building and infrastructure projects. Project goals and processes through the whole life cycle, from planning to renovation or removal, should demonstrate explicitly the economic, environmental, and social benefits to the communities affected.
  • Ensuring that concerted actions are taken to achieve sustainability in buildings and communities requires credible, knowledgeable, patient, and charismatic leaders (“champions”) for each group of stakeholders (at the national, state, local, industry, and project levels). The building community (through NIBS and other organizations) should give substantial attention to identifying, informing, and empowering potential champions.
  • Providing the body of knowledge and tools for sustainable building and infrastructure practices requires substantial, comprehensive, and sustained programs of research, development, and demonstration (RDD). Policymakers and the building community need mechanisms to coordinate and advance the programs of the numerous public agencies, private foundations, and private industries that fund RDD for sustainable buildings and infrastructure. Agencies should consider what interdisciplinary, multi-sponsored research is needed and stimulate the necessary funding, with clear indications of what benefits are to be achieved.
  • To achieve true long-term sustainability of buildings and related infrastructure, designers, constructors, operators, and owners must incorporate such concepts into the practices, standards, and codes used throughout the life cycles of constructed facilities. The multi-faceted nature of sustainability requires that standards and practices state explicit performance requirements and have conformance assessment systems capable of accepting innovations. Building codes and infrastructure regulations should cite up-to-date, performance-based standards to ensure acceptability of designs that provide better than minimal performance. As indicated above, the building community should undertake efforts to coordinate the establishment and use of consistent metrics.
  • Formal and continuing education programs should provide professionals and technicians with the multi-disciplinary body of knowledge required to achieve sustainability in buildings. Each discipline or specialty involved in construction needs to understand the economic, environmental, and social implications of its work, as well as its own special body of knowledge.
  • Nationally recognized professional and technician licensure and certification programs should demonstrate how sustainability can be implemented in regular practice to address the needs of clients, employers, and the public. Authoritatively accredited certification programs should be developed to recognize needed professional and technical expertise in sustainability.
  • The economy must have a strong financial and insurance capacity to provide society with the benefits of a sustainable built environment. To attract the financing required to produce sustainable buildings and infrastructure, investors need studies demonstrating increased public and private returns on investment.
  • Governance-focused organizations should develop and demonstrate model processes for improving the efficiency of the regulatory process for important classes of building and infrastructure projects. Where needed, the statutory authorities of regulatory agencies should be modified to enable participation in a streamlined process.

Education and Training

Buildings have a complex life cycle, from concept, design, and construction to commissioning, occupancy, modification/renovation, and deconstruction. Education and training within the building professions must reflect this complexity and the specific skill needs at each point in the building’s life cycle. These life-cycle considerations include efficient use of energy and water through reduced waste and demand management, improved occupant comfort and health, and upgrading the human-building system interface. In each period within the building’s life cycle, particular segments of the building community must be engaged and have the requisite knowledge to adequately address the unique needs within that period.

Essential audiences for education and training include:

  • owner
  • commissioning agent/authority
  • general contractor
  • engineer
  • architect
  • installation contractor
  • service contractor
  • facilities manager
  • operations and management
  • users/occupants
  • support contractors (including support contractors not directly related to systems maintenance, e.g., the cleaning and replenishment services)
  • inspectors and enforcement personnel.

Requirements may be different across residential, commercial, industrial, and specialized buildings (such as hospitals, laboratories, schools), so training should specifically relate to the building types for which personnel are responsible.

While it is essential that people who enter a particular career get education and training initially, training must continue throughout their careers. Best practices go stale, equipment and processes change, and new regulatory requirements go into effect. To ensure professionals seek out and retain it, such education and training must be dynamic and engaging.

Communication across all disciplines engaged in the building process is critical to achieving high-performance requirements. However, changes in current communication channels are needed because buildings are becoming more automated, and the technologies and management processes to operate, maintain, and minimize energy consumption are requiring increasing levels of integration.

Incentives are needed to motivate businesses and organizations to see beyond short-term, financially driven bottom lines and look to the future in preparing the U.S. workforce for the challenges, complexities, technologies, and competitive demands of the global economy. Education and training incentive programs should encompass all construction, maintenance, and operational core competencies in the three primary building sectors: residential, commercial, and industrial. Incentive programs should extend from apprenticeship programs and specific task training to professional development. Programs should include continuing education to achieve or maintain levels of recognized third-party certification or similar levels of accreditation. They also should be available to all Americans, especially veterans
and minorities.

Note

1. U.S. EPA, Water Supply and Use in the United States (2008).

Excerpts from the NIBS 2010 Annual Report to the President of the United States reprinted with permission. For the full report, see www.nibs.org/client/assets/files/nibs/2010_AnnualReport.pdf.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

U.S. Power Industry–and Insulation–Outlook for New Build

Electric load is returning for U.S. utilities as the country shows signs of emerging from the recession. If anticipated economic growth occurs, there will be a need for new generation. In addition, environmental regulations will cause retirements and retrofits of existing power plants. As utilities plan their futures, they must decide which plants to retrofit, which to retire, and how much new generation is needed. Where is the U.S. power industry headed with these new generation projects?

The drivers for power plant technology choices are complex. There’s an old saying in the power industry: “Technology tells you what you can do, economics tell you what you should do, and politics tell you what you will do.” This article will examine power technologies available, the economics associated with each, some of the political factors that affect them, where Black & Veatch thinks the industry is headed, and, ultimately, the potential for insulation work in each case.

These are the major technologies for the production of electricity in the United States:

  • Fossil-fuel-fired plants, primarily coal and gas
  • Renewable resource technologies, primarily biomass, hydro, solar, and wind
  • Nuclear power.

The world wants plentiful, cheap, sustainable energy that produces no harmful emissions or waste. In the United States, in spite of energy conservation measures and increasing efficiencies, electricity demand is expected to increase about 20 percent by 2035.1 Figure 1 shows the current contribution by various fuel sources in the U.S. energy mix and projections for the next 25 years, according to Black & Veatch’s Fall 2010 Energy Market Perspective (Note: A new report will be finalized later this summer, and these estimates are subject to change).

Several notable trends are expected in the next quarter century, with renewables showing the biggest percentage increase, as well as an increase in gas-fired plants and decreases in coal. The events in Japan earlier this year will result in a focus on operating nuclear facilities in the near-term; however, Black & Veatch believes that the resiliency of the nuclear industry will ensure that new build activities resume.

As we look at the drivers of change in the overall generation mix of the U.S. fleet, which are the most compelling: economics, environment, or operability? For a well-balanced asset portfolio, the answer is that all three must be considered.

Renewable Energy

Installed renewable energy capacity has increased dramatically over the past 10 years, as seen in Figure 2. This has been the result of regulatory and incentive policies. The continued push to install new renewable capacity will have the same drivers, but the probability of a carbon cap mechanism will further increase the cost-competitiveness of renewables.

As seen in Figure 3, the installed renewable capacity is predominantly wind. This has been driven by maturing project economics coupled with significant technology advances and incentive policies that made wind competitive with conventional generation alternatives.

There are two primary solar technologies: solar photovoltaic (PV) and solar thermal. A solar PV plant comprises a very large array of panels, connected to produce a significant amount of electricity. A solar thermal plant concentrates solar energy to harvest energy as heat. The heat is used to make steam to power a steam turbine. Solar thermal plants are more similar to a conventional fossil-fuel-fired plant when compared to solar PV. Molten salt energy storage systems associated with solar thermal are a commercially viable technology and provide more opportunities for insulation work.

Solar PV recently has become the preferred solar
technology because thermal plants have proven more
difficult to permit. Like wind, tremendous growth has been seen in the solar PV market, as similar manufacturing technology expertise and incentive policies have made PV competitive in peaking power markets. This trend is equally valid in international and domestic markets, although some international markets have grown even more than the U.S. market.

As wind and solar will be an increasingly important part of the U.S. energy mix, the industry has recognized the need to mitigate periodic intermittency of the generation from these two technologies. The answers range from transmission upgrades to energy storage to rapid response gas turbines. Each of these potential solutions will be a part of the changing landscape of the electric utility industry.

Biomass has traditionally supplied a large portion of the renewable generation in the United States. However, the magnitude of biomass capacity additions is anticipated to be relatively small in the near- to mid-term as compared to those of wind and solar. Regulatory uncertainty has hindered decision making regarding several proposed biomass projects, although several biomass plants are anticipated to come online in each of the next few years.

Hydroelectric power is inherently clean, with no direct emissions or waste from the generation of electricity from moving water. There are a number of environmental concerns that may limit development of large hydro projects; however, there may be opportunities for small hydro, run-of-river hydro, and upgrades and retrofits of new hydroelectric generation in existing dams. In its fifth annual Strategic Directions in the Electric Utility Industry survey, in which more than 700 U.S. utility leaders participated, Black & Veatch reported that water supply has become the top environmental concern among survey participants, and water management was rated as the business issue that could have the greatest impact on the utility industry.

Geothermal utilizes naturally occurring underground temperature gradient to generate steam and power. For power generation applications in the United States, the available resource is primarily found in the Southwest. Technologies are developing that enable more cost-effective utilization of low-temperature resources. Black & Veatch expects that economically viable projects will continue to be developed in this niche market and be a part of the renewable energy portfolio in the United States.

The pace of wind and solar facility projects deployment is accelerating, which will further drive prices down. The push by the government and public opinion will drive subsidies that will help mitigate the cost and will also drive improvements in the technology that will make them more cost-competitive. This improvement in the cost of installed generation will likely be coupled with a cost of carbon emissions for fossil-fueled technologies. The result is that the annual generation from renewables is expected to triple over the next 25 years.

Conventional Fuels

As the Energy Market Perspective forecast shows in Figure 1, the United States will continue to depend heavily on coal and gas. The country has plenty of coal reserves, and thanks to cheap, available gas resulting from unconventional sources such as shale gas, the outlook for gas-fired generation is bright. In addition, the United States has its own nuclear fuel supplies. “Altogether, the United States still has the fourth largest deposits of uranium in the world, behind Australia, Canada, and Kazakhstan.”2 The United States does not rank high in uranium production only because the demand has not been there.

Coal

Coal-fired power plants have been built and operated in the United States since the 1880s. Coal is plentiful, and efficiencies have improved tremendously. Over the last several years, environmental regulations have become increasingly stringent for air emissions and liquid and solid waste disposal. The control technologies exist and are being applied to both new and existing units. As the possibility of a CO2 cap becomes more likely, the economics of coal will change.

Capture and sequestration of CO2 presently carry a high price tag. President Obama in his 2011 State of the Union message acknowledged that clean coal would be a necessary part of the United States’ energy mix, at least for the near-term. However, it is not so much the “politics tells you what you will do” part of the axiom that’s driving that; it’s the “economics tells you what you should do.” Low natural gas prices (and moderate equipment prices) make gas plants more economically attractive than coal-fired plants today, with half the CO2 emissions.

The long-term market for new coal-fired generation will depend on the commercialization and cost of state-of-the-art technologies, including ultrasupercritical pulverized coal, integrated gasification combined cycle, and carbon capture. If these technologies can be cost-effectively built and operated, and if CO2 prices are low or non-existent, new coal generation may remain viable.

Gas

In the late ’80s and the ’90s, gas-fired combined cycle plants were the primary choice for new power generation facilities. Gas is a relatively clean-burning fuel, and as long as gas remained inexpensive it was the clear economic choice over coal. In the late ’90s the price of natural gas increased. By the year 2000, high gas prices and an excess of newly built capacity halted construction of most gas-fired plants. In the mid-2000s, most new generation was coal-fueled.

Now the pendulum is swinging again. Natural gas prices peaked in 2008, but the development of less-expensive shale gas and the discovery of new reserves have caused prices to drop dramatically. The lower fuel cost, coupled with the fact that a gas-fired plant produces only about half the amount of CO2 that a coal plant of the same size would produce, makes gas-fired combined cycle plants the more attractive alternative again in most cases. Speed to market and operating flexibility are also considerations as gas-fired projects can be completed relatively quickly (coal plants can take up to 4 to 5 years to complete) and started up and shut down to meet demand, particularly when electricity prices are most attractive. Technology advances have made gas-fired generation a good option for firming intermittent wind generation.

The goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is partially met with gas-fired generation. As President & CEO of Black & Veatch’s energy business Dean Oskvig put it, “Combined cycle gas plants can buy us some time.” But in the drive to achieve a major reduction in global CO2 emissions eventually, nuclear power is also expected to play a role.

Nuclear Power

Steve Rus, Executive Director of Black & Veatch’s nuclear business, predicts a nuclear renaissance in this country. Efficiencies and overall capacities at existing nuclear plants have been improved over the years to near maximum levels, so additional nuclear generating capacity will have to come from new units. No new nuclear plants have been commissioned in the United States since the 1990s. Before the tsunami and earthquakes in Japan, Rus and other industry experts predicted new nuclear plants would start construction in the United States in this decade. This timetable may be delayed, but there are still new nuclear plants in the foreseeable future.

Nuclear power is attractive in many ways. Nuclear plants have high power density (high MW production with a relatively small physical footprint), high capacity factor, and a low fuel cost. So although nuclear has a high capital cost, nuclear power can be cheap to generate. In addition, nuclear power is the only source of baseload generation that is free of greenhouse gases.

Industry estimates for the cost of a new plant vary from approximately $6,000 to $10,000/kW. The high cost and wide range of variation in cost estimates make nuclear a higher-stake investment than other generation technologies. Safety concerns in the aftermath of Japan’s experience obviously have also recently contributed to investment hesitation. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has a number of pending applications for new plants (30+ as of this writing). But all of those applications came before the earthquake and tsunami hit Japan. It is difficult to predict at this point when or if those projects will move forward. Nevertheless, the impetus is clearly there for the United States to move forward with new nuclear capacity.

Summary

The U.S. electric market will experience some large changes over the next 25 years. Gas-fired generation could more than double; renewable generation could triple; and coal generation could fall by nearly half. At the same time, nuclear could make modest gains. Along the way political, environmental, and cost drivers will provide the decision points the industry will look to to help determine the right mix of generation assets. The unique needs of individual utilities will continue to require unique answers to generation planning. Utilities that currently have a lot of older coal units will likely see the largest changes in their portfolios. Utilities that have a lot of gas generation may find a need to diversify their fuel mix. Utilities in states with high renewable portfolio standard requirements may have to find ways to add renewables.

“Technology tells us what we can do, economics tell us what we should do, politics tell us what we will do.” Technology tells us that we have many commercial generation options available to us today. Economics tells us gas-fired combined cycle plants are a low-cost baseload or intermediate load choice at present to address power demand as domestic growth resumes, but they are only part of the solution. Politics say renewable and nuclear energy should go a long way to easing CO2 concerns. In the case of nuclear plants, the public and investors must understand that nuclear plants can be built safely and that spent fuel can be managed.

The Insulation Outlook

What does all of this mean for the possibilities for insulation work? Many wind and solar projects will be designed and built. There is virtually no insulation associated with wind energy, and almost none with solar photovoltaic. It remains to be seen how many solar thermal plants will be built, but there will be some, and they will be very large-scale insulation jobs, with possibly miles of pipe to be insulated. This insulation work will, for the most part, be very similar to that for fossil-fueled plants with a steam cycle.

The best news for the mechanical insulation industry is that it can expect to see a lot of combined cycle plant work in the near-term and nuclear plant work farther down the road. The combined cycle work will be familiar in scale and approach. Nuclear plant insulation work is much more challenging than for other technologies. The insulation is an engineered system with pieces specifically designed for each equipment item and pipe segment. The materials must be able to stand up to a radioactive environment in addition to the usual environmental factors. Much of the equipment to be insulated is unfamiliar; the QA requirements are more rigorous; inspections are much more stringent. When the construction of nuclear plants ramps up, there will be significant insulation work, and that work will offer challenges not seen in the United States for 20 years or more. The insulation industry and design/build companies like Black & Veatch must be prepared to work together to meet those challenges.

Notes

1. Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2011, Energy Consumption by Sector and Source, United States, Reference source (electricity, all sectors).

2. “Will Virginia Be the Catalyst for a U.S. Uranium Reversal of Fortune?” March 8, 2011. Nuclear Townhall (www.nucleartownhall.com, June 7, 2011).

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Seeing Clearly on a Not-So-Clear Day

Anyone who has ever been responsible for the energy efficiency of an industrial, commercial, or institutional facility has undoubtedly at some point experienced frustration at not being able to get funding for energy efficiency improvements. Even what seem to be obvious “no brainers” like insulation or steam trap installation and maintenance often go without adequate funding. Those familiar with that frustration may enjoy this story of how I stumbled into getting funding for insulation.

Energy efficiency has long been important at Dow’s Specialty Monomers site in Deer Park, Texas (formerly Rohm and Haas). This site, which has operated for more than 62 years, is on the Houston Ship Channel approximately 22 miles east of downtown Houston. The site is over 900 acres and employs more than 800 people. It hosts as many as 11 plants, many of which are highly exothermic, so it has a complicated steam distribution and management system.

An energy team has existed at the site since 1997, looking at a variety of methods to reduce the site’s energy consumption, including capital projects, process improvements, management systems, and other innovative approaches. I took over leadership of the site’s energy team in early 2000 and managed it for about 8 years.

One of the innovations we adopted was an integrated energy management system called Visual MESA sold commercially by Soteica. It is a highly accurate thermodynamic model of the site’s energy users, and one of the features we implemented is a real-time energy intensity monitor.

Energy intensity, a measure of a manufacturer’s efficiency, is calculated simply by dividing the energy used to make a product by the amount of product being made. A typical unit for energy intensity is Btu per pound of product. At the Deer Park site, the energy intensity was calculated monthly using energy and production accounting data before the implementation of the Visual MESA system. Visual MESA gave the site the ability to look at the amount of energy being used at any given moment and the pounds of product being produced at that moment, and then calculate a real-time energy intensity.

While the system was newly implemented and was still being fine tuned, a number of engineers were watching the Visual MESA screen one summer day when a typical Gulf Coast heavy rainstorm rolled in. As the torrential rain hit bare, uninsulated pipe throughout the site and soaked insulation missing lagging, the real-time energy intensity more than doubled!

The effect was striking. As the engineers talked excitedly about the results, a small crowd gathered around the screen. A high-level manager happened to be walking by and wondered what all the excitement was about. When the information display was explained to him, he said he had never seen anything that more clearly showed the value of insulation or the importance of properly maintaining it.

Not long afterward, I asked this manager for funding for an insulation upgrade project. I’ll never know for sure, but I believe his experience watching the energy intensity display a few days earlier played a big part in his granting me the full amount.

After more than 30 years working with industrial energy, I believe that the easiest, lowest risk, most secure return projects are very often the simplest: insulation upgrades and maintenance, steam trap maintenance, and steam leak repairs. Unfortunately, we rarely have a chance to show management the effects as clearly as I did that summer day in Houston.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Energy Appraisals: Invest in Efficiency

In this tough economy, who doesn’t want to reduce their energy bill,
especially if the payback period is short and the return on investment large? Across the country, nearly 800 Certified Insulation Energy Appraisers are surveying facilities and calculating how much energy and greenhouse gas emissions customers could save by repairing, replacing, or upgrading their mechanical insulation. Following are two examples of how the Insulation Energy Appraisal Program (IEAP) benefits everyone involved.

Appraisal Adds to Paper Mill’s Bottom Line

by Mark Reed

A paper mill in Central Maine was looking for ways to stay competitive in this tough economy by maintaining the same production while reducing energy costs. A mill-wide energy survey had recently identified the steam system as a source of energy-saving opportunities.

While visiting the mill, Zampell’s team noticed bare steam and condensate piping going to unit heaters and realized that adding mechanical insulation to the piping could achieve significant energy savings. The team discussed their ideas with the mill’s energy manager, and he agreed to look at the survey results. He indicated that if the return on investment (ROI) fell within 1-2 years, he would be able to go ahead with the insulation project. As a Certified Insulation Energy Appraiser with Zampell Companies, I met with the mill’s energy manager to determine the appraisal’s scope: steam and condensate piping to the plant’s unit heaters.

After gathering the needed process and cost data and measuring the piping, I used the 3E Plus® software to quantify potential improvements in energy savings, greenhouse gas emissions, and overall cost savings. The 3E Plus program is designed to calculate the thermal performance of both insulated and uninsulated piping, ducts, and equipment; translate Btu losses into actual dollars; and calculate greenhouse gas emissions and reductions. All appraisers receive training in the use of 3E Plus as part of the National Insulation Association’s (NIA’s) Insulation Energy Appraisal Program (IEAP) certification process.

My appraisal report documented:

  • Energy costs and Btu losses with existing steam and condensate system insulation
  • Potential fuel cost savings and Btu savings with an insulation upgrade
  • Potential environmental impact of reduced greenhouse gas emissions from the increased energy savings and reduced fuel consumption.

I then met with the mill’s energy manager to review the insulation option and payback scenarios. The survey demonstrated significant savings, as highlighted in the simple ROI summary in Figure 1.

The IEAP survey quantified the energy and cost savings, as well as presenting a payback scenario that exceeded the energy manager’s criteria. He was surprised that the savings were so significant, since the unit heaters only run for 7 months of the year. He said that while he knew insulation was important, it was always hard to put a cost on it. He added that being able to quantify the savings so they can be understood by the operators as well as the accountant is a big help in this economy.

What started as a routine visit to a client and noticing some bare steam piping ended with the Zampell team using the tools and training from NIA’s IEAP to create a win/win scenario for their customer: reduced steam load and significant cost savings.

Appraisal Shows Hospital that Insulation Pays Off

By Peter Gauchel

L&C Insulation, Inc., embarked on a project with Gundersen Lutheran Hospital to save energy in September 2010. The hospital’s energy engineer, Corey Zarecki, was in charge of energy savings throughout the hospital campus and had implemented projects such as installing new steam traps throughout the hospital and building an electric generating plant fueled by gas discharge from the local brewery.

L&C Insulation proposed an energy appraisal throughout the Gundersen Lutheran campus addressing all uninsulated systems with operating temperatures above 140°F, including steam, steam condensate, and heating hot water systems. The steam items included uninsulated traps, strainers, unions, valves, piping, and the steam boiler bodies. Pipe sizes ranged from 4 in. to ½ in., with the majority in the 1 in. to ¾ in. range. The heating hot water items included uninsulated valves, unions, strainers, and pump bodies, with the pipe sizes for these items ranging from 6 in. to ¾ in.

The survey of the uninsulated items covered approximately 30 mechanical rooms of various sizes in five buildings and took several weeks to accomplish. Once the survey was complete, the data was put into the 3E Plus® software, which produced some remarkable savings.

Each building surveyed had an individual appraisal on the items for that building. All appraisals were then compiled, resulting in $48,727 in savings per year.

L&C Insulation then created a proposal to insulate all the identified items with fiberglass pipe insulation for the piping and custom-made removable reusable insulation blankets for all the valves, traps, unions, strainers, pump bodies, and bodies of the boilers. This project was estimated to have a 3.25 year payback.

This payback was acceptable to the hospital but was longer than many other paybacks for insulation projects due to the large number of small traps, unions, and strainers being addressed. Insulating small items is usually not as cost efficient as insulating larger items—e.g., 4 in. and larger valves, strainers, etc.—due to the labor required.

Once all the steam items were analyzed, the small steam items (2 in. and smaller) resulted in a payback of approximately 4.68 years, while the larger steam items (3 in. and larger) resulted in a payback of 11 months. Insulating preinsulated side walls on the steam boilers, which had a surface temperature of 150°F, was also considered and resulted in an average payback of 3.3 years. (The boiler manufacturer explained that insulating the boiler ends would risk warping the boiler doors, so that was not considered.) The heating hot water boilers had a surface temperature of 130°F, and insulating over the factory-insulated boiler sidewalls resulted in a 6.7-year payback.

Insulating all the boilers combined resulted in a 4.77-year payback. When these numbers were put into the Mechanical Insulation Design Guide Financial Calculator, they resulted in a 23.4 percent rate of return over a 20-year period.

With these results, funding was secured and the projects were completed in a 3-month period through the winter. By investing in this project, the hospital will realize a 33.7 percent return on their original investment over a 20-year period. Zarecki said that a 33.7 percent return on investment was something they could not produce anywhere else in the facility.

How You Can Benefit Too

If you’re looking to reduce your energy bill, find a Certified Insulation Energy Appraiser near you at www.insulation.org/training/ieap/appraisers.cfm. If you’re an insulation contractor who wants to expand the services you offer your customers, find out how to become certified at www.insulation.org/training/ieap. In addition to attending an NIA-sponsored course, companies can sponsor IEAP training courses in-house. Contact Julie Cupp at jcupp@insulation.org or 703-464-6422, ext. 114, for more information.

Figure 1
NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Codes Update: Commercial Energy Codes

Nationwide, the requirements for complying with commercial energy codes have changed, and there may be new requirements in your state. The commercial energy code map in Figure 1 indicates that the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), 2009 IECC, and American Society for Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1 standard are gaining momentum, as more states begin to comply with the federal mandate of the 1992 Energy Policy Act, which requires all states to have a policy to reduce energy usage that meets or exceeds ASHRAE 90.1.

As Figure 1 demonstrates, it is not easy to determine what insulation thickness is needed for energy code compliance. It is important to ask energy code questions before starting the project and consult ASHRAE tables such as the ones excerpted in this article.

For instance, consider Table 6.8.3A in Figure 2. To determine the minimum pipe insulation thicknesses needed for 3-in. IPS pipe operating at 300°F, select the temperature from the far left column and then select the pipe diameter from a column in the nominal pipe area. In this example, an insulation that has thermal conductivity in the range of 0.29 to 0.32 at 200°F mean temperature would be applicable. To meet the energy code requirement, a minimum pipe insulation thickness of 4.5 in. is necessary.

Tables 6.8.2A and 6.8.2B (see Figure 3) can be used to determine the insulation thickness for both supply and return air ductwork.

ASHRAE 90.1-2010 includes a new, more stringent table. ASHRAE 189.1-2009 and IECC 2009 featured changes to their required energy code thickness tables (see Figures 4 and 5). It is important to understand the energy requirements of the specific job before determining the insulation thickness needed.

To determine the minimum pipe insulation thicknesses needed for 3-in. IPS pipe operating at 300°F, select the temperature from the far left column and then select the pipe diameter from a column in the nominal pipe area. In this example, an insulation that has thermal conductivity in the range of 0.29 to 0.32 at 200°F mean temperature would be applicable. To meet the energy code requirement, a minimum pipe insulation thickness of 3.5 in. is necessary. Note if this table is used, then insulation thickness is 1 in. less than ASHRAE 90.1-2010.

Future Code Requirements

With the movement toward the 2030 Challenge, which calls for all new buildings to be carbon-neutral by 2030 (http://architecture2030.org), insulation thickness requirements will probably continue to go up. More R-8 and R-5 duct insulation is being specified, and R-values will continue to grow toward R-10 and R-12. With LEED and green building projects increasing and the insulation thickness requirements going up, wall spacing and thickness, as well as pipe chase openings and spacing, will all need to be considered in the design of future buildings.

The mechanical insulation industry needs to participate in energy code development, as increased insulation thickness is not always in the best interest of the construction industry. For above-ambient applications, the energy saved is nominal above 2 in. of insulation. For below-ambient applications, the insulation thickness must take into consideration ambient conditions, in particular relative humidity. None of the energy codes referenced in this article consider the insulation thickness needed for condensation control.

To learn more about or participate in IECC code development, visit www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/Pages/cycle.aspx. To submit code proposals to ASHRAE standards, visit www.ashrae.org/technology/page/812.

The Building Codes Assistance Project (BCAP) provides assistance on building energy code adoption and implementation. The organization assists state and local regulatory and legislative bodies and helps coordinate others representing environmental interests, consumers, labor, and industry. BCAP can help states that request assistance, using funding from the U.S. Department of Energy. To learn more, visit www.bcap-energy.org.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Preventing and Treating Mold

It is much easier to prevent mold than treat it. As part of a preventive maintenance program, interior and exterior insulated areas should be inspected quarterly or, at a minimum, semi-annually.

  • Use a digital camera to document areas and compare to prior conditions.
  • Fix small problems. Ignoring a problem usually means it will resurface later—typically bigger.
  • Get up on a ladder for hard-to-reach areas.
  • If possible, use a thermal camera to see where heat or cold is leaking from pipes. This is a good indicator of a potential problem. (A local remediation or energy
    survey company may have one.)

If mold is detected, remember it is alive and growing. Do not immediately rip down the affected areas—consider the effects of spreading tens of millions of spores through the HVAC system.

  • First, locate the source of moisture and repair it as soon as possible.
  • Consider sectioning off or containing areas so cross contamination does not occur. Air scrubbers/negative air machines can help prevent cross contamination.
  • Covering the area with plastic so it is not visible to passersby may prevent inaccurate information from spreading until a plan of action is determined.

Local laws may direct what must be done if mold is present. At a minimum, refer to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s “Mold Remediation in Schools & Commercial Buildings” at www.epa.gov/mold/mold_remediation.html.
Mold is not regulated, as it is nearly impossible to remove all spores from any environment. However, mold is considered a hazard for insurance purposes, and coverage is often limited if mold needs to be professionally removed.

If mold is growing in a facility, chances are it has been there for some time. Mold does not turn a section of insulation or other porous building material black or green in a day or two. It takes weeks or even months of a small drip, leak, or penetration for mold to become visible. Preventive maintenance, true to its name, can prevent mold before it becomes noticeable. While regular inspections may not catch all problems, they find many that would be worse if detected later.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Mold and Insulation in Hot and Humid Climates

Mold in buildings isn’t a new problem. However, it seems that we increasingly hear about it—sometimes even on the news. Why should we care?

There are several reasons. Mold is not only unsightly; it can deteriorate the building materials on which it grows. It also poses a health threat to people in the occupied space. Some types of mold are worse than others from a health point of view, but all mold in buildings is highly undesirable and, left to fester, often results in costly lawsuits.

Mold growth can show up on many different types of building materials, including mechanical insulation
materials.

Examples of Mold

Four hurricanes hit Florida during the summer and fall of 2004: Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne. They caused $50 billion in damage in that state alone, much of which was related to mold growth in thousands of homes and commercial buildings. The high winds ripped off roof shingles and broke windows, allowing rain to soak walls and floors, and there was no power for air conditioning systems and fans to dry the buildings out.

When the paper facing on drywall becomes wet and stays wet, it is a great food source for mold. There were reports of mold within 2 days after the hurricanes. Florida’s hot and humid climate greatly aggravated the situation, making it more difficult to dry the building materials.

Another example: When Enron Corporation went bankrupt in late 2001, it stopped paying the utility bills for its Houston headquarters and basically turned the building keys over to the courts. Several years later, when Chevron Corporation purchased the building, it was reportedly covered with mold throughout its interior, particularly the walls. The walls weren?t wet; sustained high humidity combined with cellulosic building materials (such as paper facing on drywall) resulted in extensive mold growth. And, of course, Houston has more than 2,000 hours a year with relative humidity (RH) greater than 90 percent and an American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) design dew point temperature of 79°F.

Another source of severe mold problems that many builders in the Southeast—in the ASHRAE-defined hot and humid climate zone—have learned the hard way is using vinyl wallpaper on exterior walls. Vinyl wallpaper has a very low water vapor permeance, making it an effective vapor retarder, and the inside surface of a wall is the wrong side for the vapor retarder in a hot and humid climate. With the building’s interior temperature controlled to something like 75°F and the outdoor dew point exceeding 75°F for hundreds of hours per year, high humidity and even condensation existed between the vinyl wallpaper and the drywall surface to which it is adhered. With the paper drywall surface and moisture to feed on, the mold spores, always present in the air, thrive.

Many other situations can lead to mold in buildings, such as water leaks from pipes in wall cavities; air conditioning ducts running through unconditioned, vented attics with insufficient duct insulation to prevent surface condensation; and similar situations with unconditioned, vented crawl spaces.

Mold Basics

There are several contributing causes to mold in buildings:

  • Presence of mold spores in the ambient air
  • Moisture
  • Food or nourishment for mold
  • Oxygen
  • Moderate temperatures (normal room temperatures are ideal for many common types of mold)
  • Time.

The type of mold most common in buildings, where paper or wood may be present, is stachybotrys chartarum. Mold spores are always in the air. Moisture can be either high humidity (greater than 80 percent) or water, although mold grows more quickly when water is present. Airborne dust that has settled on a surface can also support mold growth (this author has seen mold on the aluminum siding of a building, a consequence of dust collecting on the surface over many years). Among building materials, paper and wood are the most common sources of food; paper is easier for mold to digest. Another curious aspect of mold is that once started, it attracts moisture from the air and makes the mold-growing surface even more moist, further fostering its growth.

Since mold requires either high humidity or water to grow, it is unlikely to be a problem in a continuously conditioned (i.e., continuously dehumidified) building with a good roof, leak-free plumbing, and a sealed envelope. The problems arise when moisture gets into a building as high humidity and/or water for an extended period.

Leaks in roofs or plumbing can introduce sufficient moisture for mold to grow in either a building under construction or an existing building. A building under construction can be a victim of mold if construction materials stored outside are not correctly covered and become wet.

Another concern for a building under construction is high humidity. If temporary dehumidified air is not provided and the HVAC system is not yet fully operational, then entryways, staircase doors, etc., that are open to the outdoors can allow humid outdoor air into the building. After construction is complete, there is a threat of mold if the air conditioning and dehumidification is shut off for extended periods (a colleague calls this “the idle building syndrome”).

The ASHRAE Design Guide for Buildings in Hot & Humid Climates recommends that buildings in these climatic zones be dehumidified to a dew point temperature less than 55°F at all times, even if the indoor air temperature is allowed to drift upward during unoccupied periods to save energy. For buildings under construction, the ASHRAE guide recommends that the permanent HVAC system not be used for dehumidification, since the system is not designed to do this under construction conditions. Instead, it strongly recommends the use of temporary dehumidification equipment to remove moisture from the building interior and maintain a low dew point temperature.

Drywall with untreated paper facing is the most common source of food for mold in buildings. Drywall is available with paper treated with a fungicide that can protect against mold growth; however, even drywall faced with treated paper is likely to eventually grow mold if wet and warm for an extended period. This is a much greater threat in a hot and humid climate because of the time factor: building materials, once they become wet, are more likely to remain that way.

Mold and Mechanical Insulation

Thermal insulation materials used for mechanical insulation do not support mold growth. Mold cannot feed off fiberglass, mineral wool, flexible elastomeric, cellular glass, or any plastic foam insulation materials. However, when paper is used in a facing, such as kraft paper in conventional all service jacket (ASJ) or foil scrim kraft (FSK), it can be a source of food for mold. These two products are treated with a fungicide to discourage microbiological growth, and this treatment is, to the best of this author’s knowledge, successful in preventing mold growth under high humidity conditions, even when sustained for a long period. However, if treated kraft paper becomes wet and stays wet for an extended period, it will grow mold. If used to insulate either chilled air ducts or chilled water pipes under sustained high humidity conditions, it will likely not dry out.

If fiberglass boards with FSK (a laminate of aluminum foil, glass fiber scrim, and kraft paper) get wet during construction, they should be discarded and replaced. The risk of mold is too great to use them, and wet materials don?t insulate well. On outdoor ducts, it is very important that an insulation system with FSK facing be covered with an outdoor jacket system that is continuously and tightly sealed against water and vapor intrusion to keep the FSK, and the insulation, dry.

Conventional ASJ (a laminate of white kraft paper, glass fiber scrim, thin aluminum foil, and a thin plastic film) used as a facing on chilled water pipe insulation will also support mold growth when it becomes and remains soaking wet from surface condensation. This can happen for various reasons, including its use in an unconditioned space in a hot and humid climate.

In an unconditioned space, the RH is high much of the time. In a construction environment, with the additional release of moisture from curing concrete and drying spackling and paint, the indoor humidity can become even greater. Usually, design conditions for insulation thickness selection in an unconditioned space are specified as 80 percent or 90 percent RH. When the RH exceeds those conditions, condensation will probably occur on pipe insulation, and it will soak into the ASJ’s kraft paper exterior surface. With the chilled water flowing continuously through the insulated pipe, the kraft paper does not dry out for a long time, perhaps as long as 9 months for hot and humid places.

In this author’s experience, conventional ASJ is the most commonly used vapor retarder on indoor commercial pipe insulation in North America, and mold growing on pipes in dry, conditioned spaces is unheard of. However, in unconditioned or inadequately conditioned spaces where surface condensation can occur during periods of high humidity, there is always the threat of mold growth if the ASJ becomes and stays wet. To avoid mold growth, ASJ should not be used on chilled water pipe insulation in these circumstances unless totally covered with a continuously sealed, low permeance plastic film jacketing such as PVC
(as shown in the study performed a decade ago for NAIMA by John Mumaw1).

The ASHRAE 2009 Handbook of Fundamentals warns the mechanical designer of the threat of mold growth when using conventional ASJ:

“Note that ASJs may have service limitations on below-ambient systems in wet environments. Condensation on the surface (possibly caused by inadequate insulation thickness), or moisture migration under the ASJ (through breaches or holes), or liquid or water (from an outside source) can degrade the ASJ by mold growth on the paper and/or corrosion of the aluminum vapor retarder component….

“…The moisture-sensitive nature of paper and the relative frailty of aluminum foil can be problematic in the potentially high-moisture environment of below ambient applications. Exposure to water, either from condensation caused by inadequate insulation thickness or from ambient sources, can cause degradation and distortion of the paper, higher likelihood of mold growth, and foil corrosion, leading to vapor retarder failure….”2

Conclusion

To avoid mold growth in buildings, the best practice is to prevent water leakage into the building and to keep it dehumidified to a dew point temperature less than 55°F at all times. If leaks do occur or the dehumidification system becomes inoperative, it is important to correct the problem(s) as soon as possible and dry the building and the materials inside. A mold problem should not be allowed to fester, since it will invariably become worse. This is particularly critical when the building is in a hot and humid climate and the space is unconditioned.

Notes

1. Mumaw, John, “Below Ambient Piping Insulation Systems,” Insulation Outlook, September 2001.

2. ASHRAE 2009 Handbook of Fundamentals,
Chapter 23: “Insulation for Mechanical Systems.”

References

Goldschmidt, Michael, “Managing household mold,” University of Missouri Extension, June 19, 2009.

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings.

Harriman, Lewis G., and Lstiburek, Joseph W., The ASHRAE Design Guide for Buildings in Hot & Humid Climates, Second Edition, 2009.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Factory Jacketed Pipe Insulation for Outdoor Applications

Some types of thermal insulation materials, including polyolefin, flexible elastomeric, fiberglass, and calcium silicate, have become commercially available with factory-applied jacketing in an effort to increase productivity and improve material control and insulation system performance. Polystyrene, polyisocyanurate, and phenolic foam insulation materials are available with jacketing installed by a fabricator instead of a manufacturer, providing many of the same benefits of factory-applied jacketing.

Factory-applied jacketing types for outdoor use include coated aluminum foil and multi-ply laminates. Some factory jacketed pipe insulation systems are intended for use on above-ambient service, some on below-ambient service, and some on both. Regardless, the goals are the same: to improve insulation worker productivity, simplify material control on the jobsite, and improve insulation system performance for outdoor applications. In many applications, total installed cost savings can also be realized.

Background

While not intended for outdoor use, preformed fiberglass pipe insulation with conventional all service jacketing (ASJ) has an exposed kraft paper surface and self-sealing lap (SSL) joints. This type of jacket, which is not multi-ply, has been available for several decades. The manufacturers’ intent is to provide a pipe insulation system that can be installed quickly on either above-ambient or below-ambient service pipes, down to a 40°F service temperature, for indoor applications in conditioned or partially conditioned spaces. This pre-jacketed pipe insulation also provides single-source responsibility, since the manufacturer takes responsibility for the factory-installed ASJ as well as for the insulation material.

This product is used in North America on a large percentage of institutional and commercial indoor steam and hot water pipes. Typically, straight pipes are insulated with it and fittings are insulated with PVC fitting covers, also with fiberglass insulation. Where conformance to the ASTM standard on vapor retarders, C1136, is required, these products must have a flame spread/smoke developed rating of 25/50.

Other materials jacketed with conventional ASJ in fabrication facilities have become available as requested by specifiers and facility owners. Phenolic foam, polyisocyanurate, and cellular glass pipe insulation are often provided with conventional ASJ, added by a fabricator, for use on above- and below-ambient service in indoor applications. Fittings are normally covered with mastic or vapor retarder tape. When mastic is used in below-ambient applications, it must be a vapor retarder mastic of known thickness and vapor permeability. For either type of elbow vapor retarder, it must interface with the vapor retarder on the neighboring straight sections of pipe insulation to form a continuous vapor retarder system. Sometimes the insulation segments of these rigid foam insulation materials are adhered to one another, with “buttered joints” using an adhesive, and sometimes they are not. For below-ambient applications, it is frequently beneficial to “butter the joints” to reduce and control water vapor transmission to the chilled pipes.

Pipe insulation with factory-installed jacketing for outdoor use has not yet been accepted to the same extent as pipe insulation materials factory jacketed with ASJ. However, acceptance is increasing, and there are now a number of commercially available options.

Insulation Systems with
Factory Jacketing for Outdoor Use

Both polyolefin and flexible elastomeric pipe insulation materials, while sometimes installed outdoors with no jacketing or with a field-applied jacket, are now commercially available with coated aluminum jacketing from some manufacturers and with PVC or rubber jacketing from others. This jacketing provides:

  1. protection from physical abuse
  2. protection from ultra-violet degradation of the insulation materials and precipitation that, over time, can become absorbed by the insulation, and
  3. much lower water vapor permeance than is provided by the cellular pipe insulation material itself, which is important because these materials are usually used on below-ambient service.

With factory-applied jacketing, the insulation workers have to handle and install only one piece (the factory jacketed insulation) instead of two pieces (the insulation and the jacketing), usually provided by two different manufacturers, per standard unit length. Furthermore, when required by the specification, this factory-installed jacketing plus the insulation can have a system flame spread/smoke developed rating of 25/50 (although this is not required by code since the insulated pipes are outside the building envelope, where the code does not apply).

Figure 1 shows factory jacketed polyolefin pipe insulation being installed on a straight pipe. The jacketing is 1 mil thick aluminum foil with a polymeric coating that gives it a surface emittance of about 0.7 (as opposed to a value
< 0.1). This type of factory jacketed insulation uses an SSL lap joint and circumferential pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA) tape, which matches the jacketing, to seal the butt joints. The jacket also has a water vapor permeance, including the lap and taped joints, less than 0.005 perm.

Elbows and other fittings can be cut from factory jacketed pipe insulation straight sections using mitered patterns, as shown in Figures 2 and 3. As with the butt joints, matching tape is normally used to seal the outside of the joints between miters. This resilient insulation system has a high resistance to damage from deflection by an external load, since the insulation and jacketing both deform, then partially or totally recover once the load is removed.

Preformed fiberglass pipe insulation, previously available only with ASJ, is now commercially available with factory-applied, weather-resistant, low permeance jacketing (permeance < 0.005 perm), also with SSL. Normally covered with a multi-ply laminate jacket, this material allows the pipe insulation system to be installed as a single piece (in a single layer up to 4 in. thick) on both above- and below-ambient service down to 40°F. Matching pressure sensitive tape with a release liner can be used to seal the butt joints and other joints. PVC fitting covers with fiberglass batts within are frequently used to insulate the fittings. This insulation system can also have a flame spread/smoke developed rating of 25/50. Figure 4 shows an installed factory jacketed fiberglass pipe insulation with PVC fitting covers.

Also, calcium silicate pipe insulation has recently become commercially available with a factory-applied, weather-resistant jacketing. This is a 13-ply multi-ply laminate jacketing with SSL joints. While the factory-applied jacket also has a very low water vapor permeance, calcium silicate per ASTM C533 is only for use on above-ambient service temperatures (>80°F).

As with the previously mentioned insulation system types, the factory-applied jacketing serves to reduce the number of parts and pieces and thereby improves insulator productivity while simplifying material control. As factory applied, this insulation system also provides single-source responsibility, whereas calcium silicate with metal jacketing has two sources of material. This factory jacketed calcium silicate pipe insulation system can also have a flame spread/smoke developed rating of 25/50, although it is not required by code since this insulation is rarely used on pipes within a building’s air plenums. This system is shown in Figure 5.

Starting with a bun stock, the plastic foam insulation materials are normally cut into pipe insulation and fitting shapes, as well as other shapes, by an insulation fabricator. The same fabricator also frequently adds jacketing to the straight pipe sections, with SSL for the lap joints, providing a roll of matching pressure sensitive tape for the butt joints as well as other joints. While sometimes the insulation manufacturer recommends the use of a vapor retarder mastic or a vapor retarder adhesive tape over the insulation fittings, mitered elbows can be made from straight sections of pipe insulation fabricated with insulation jacketing (see Figure 6). In addition, prefabricated insulation elbows/fittings are often used and covered with vapor retarder mastic or vapor retarder adhesive tape.

Sometimes the plastic foam insulation manufacturer provides the factory-applied jacketing (providing single-source responsibility), and sometimes it does not. In some cases, the fabricator provides straight sections of plastic foam pipe insulation with a plastic film jacketing and provides matching pressure sensitive tape for spiral wrapping the smooth, fabricated elbows. Such an application is partly fabricator-applied jacketing and partly not. Whether it is single-source responsibility depends on the source of the jacketing.

Cellular glass pipe insulation sections are also made by fabricators into straight sections of pipe insulation with jacketing suitable for outdoor use, such as multi-ply laminates. Frequently, the elbows are formed by the fabricator and can
be covered with a suitable weather barrier, vapor retarder, mastic, or PVC fitting cover. Mitered elbows, cut from pre-jacketed straight sections of pipe insulation, can also be
fabricated. While less frequently done, such elbows can be provided with fabricator-installed jacketing.

Types of Factory-Applied Outdoor Pipe Insulation Jacketing

Several commercially available types of jacketing are used to factory jacket pipe insulation:

  1. Clear plastic-coated aluminum foil, using at least 1 mil (1/1000 in.) thick foil, with a PSA on the SSL lap joints;
  2. Weather-resistant, multi-ply laminate jacketing, usually from 5 to 13 plies and corresponding thicknesses of 6 mils to 16 mils, with a PSA on the SSL lap joints.

The above types are available with a matching PSA tape and a low water vapor permeance; the sheet aluminum and some of the multi-ply laminates have a permeance < 0.005 Perm, a value so low that many people simply refer to it as "zero permeance." Not all multi-ply laminates and plastic films are UV resistant, and only those that are should be qualified for use outdoors. If in doubt, study the manufacturer's Product Data Sheet and consult either the insulation manufacturer or the jacketing manufacturer.

Conclusion

This author has heard people say that nothing new ever happens in the mechanical insulation industry. But in the last few years, a number of new insulation products and systems have become commercially available, including factory jacketed pipe insulation intended for use outdoors. Specifiers and facility owners benefit from the availability of these systems since they increase labor productivity, which reduces labor costs. The use of these systems is also an advantage for insulation contractors because they improve labor productivity and control over materials.

Although the material cost of a particular type of pipe insulation with factory-applied jacketing is generally greater than the combined cost of the same insulation and jacketing sold separately, the installed cost of the pipe insulation with factory-applied jacketing can be less due to labor savings. Total installed cost should be considered when performing a cost evaluation of the options.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Corrosion and Insulation at Power Plants

Corrosion issues at a power plant can be very costly and, in some cases, life threatening. Not too long ago, three men were killed while working under a steam-generating boiler when a boiler supply tube weld ruptured—due in part to corrosion attack—causing hot steam and ash to fall on them. This fatal incident illustrates the importance of frequent inspections of exposed piping systems and taking the necessary steps to prevent corrosion.

The most common types of corrosion found at power plants are oxide and galvanic corrosion. Both can easily be avoided.

  • Galvanic corrosion occurs when two or more different or dissimilar types of metals make contact with each other. Galvanic corrosion has the potential to create a hole in the lagging and allow water to penetrate to the plate or casing.
  • Oxide corrosion occurs when lagging or pipe jacketing is improperly stored at a power plant. Oxide corrosion attacks the surface finish of the lagging, making it susceptible to a future hole as well as permanently damaging its look. Material with oxide corrosion must be discarded.

Plate corrosion is estimated to cost the power industry millions of dollars in repairs annually. Left unattended, it will always lead to gas or air leaks. The root cause of plate corrosion can be attributed to a failed lagging system, so potential corrosion areas can easily be prevented by periodic inspection of the installed outer lagging. A properly installed outer lagging system will keep water from getting to the plate or casing. While the chances of plate corrosion causing the death of someone working at a power plant, like those three unfortunate men, are minute, a hole in the casing or plate could potentially harm someone walking by the area.

Corrosion on piping systems that carry hot water or steam (above 150°F) can cause serious injury or death if the weld or pipe fails. Preventing corrosion on these systems is normally achieved by using conventional thermal and personnel protection insulation and jacketing systems. Properly applied insulation and outer finish or jacketing keeps water from coming in contact with the pipe or tank shell, preventing corrosion.

For power plants whose operating temperature is above 150°F, the key to preventing most plate and pipe corrosion issues is to properly protect them from water. Water is the medium that causes the electrochemical mechanism to occur that leads to pitting and eventually to holes or cracks on the substrate surface.
The problem is that a power plant has many hot and cold piping systems that are not insulated. Hot piping systems are not always insulated if they are not outside the boiler or exposed to plant personnel. Hot piping systems that do not require insulation are normally inside a vestibule or penthouse enclosure whose outside walls are externally insulated and lagged. These piping systems would, under normal conditions, not be exposed to the weather and would remain free of corrosion.

Unfortunately for the men who lost their lives, the common practice of water washing down the boiler and improper refractory maintenance can lead to pipe and plate corrosion. Improper boiler maintenance and water washing practices can allow water to enter the vestibule or penthouse and begin the corrosion process. The only way to avoid this corrosion is frequent pipe inspections inside the vestibules, proper boiler maintenance, and judicious water washing practices.

A typical power plant has many cold piping systems operating below 150°F (the temperature considered “cold” may be lower in other industries). These low-temperature piping systems are found beyond the boiler island equipment and require special attention to prevent corrosion. Under normal operating conditions, these piping systems would not require insulation. The problems arise with condensation, which is related to dew point, the temperature to which a given parcel of humid air must be cooled, at constant barometric pressure, for water vapor to condense into water. The dew point is a saturation temperature; it can change from one region or area to another and is also affected by humidity.

Un-insulated piping and tank systems can be attacked by corrosion due to condensation. To prevent this “dew-point” corrosion, the exposed piping or tank system should be covered by either a moisture-resistant paint or insulation and a weather-preventive finish (e.g., 0.016 in. aluminum jacketing). Although people may not associate insulation with preventing corrosion, insulation with a weatherproof finishing material is a good alternative to painting and is easily maintained.

Corrosion issues can be avoided, and the tragedy of those three men losing their lives should never have occurred. Oxide, galvanic, plate and pipe, and dew-point corrosion can easily be avoided, beginning with frequent plant inspections inside and outside the boiler and proper boiler maintenance and water washing practices.