Citation
Toward the application of renewable resource systems in an urban setting

Material Information

Title:
Toward the application of renewable resource systems in an urban setting
Creator:
Greenberg, Harry W
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
268 leaves in various foliations : maps ; 29 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Solar energy -- Research -- Pennsylvania -- Philadelphia ( lcsh )
Solar energy -- Research ( fast )
Pennsylvania -- Philadelphia ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaf 3).
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Master's degree in Planning and Community Development, College of Design and Planning.
Statement of Responsibility:
Harry W. Greenberg.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
08984834 ( OCLC )
ocm08984834
Classification:
LD1190.A78 1981 .G74 ( lcc )

Full Text
STUDIO 3
environmental design
auraria library
1204 00265 4714
Toward the Application of Renewable Resource Systems In an Urban Setting.
Harry W. Greenberg


Acknowledgements
Dr. Charles Burnette, Bertrum Schultz, Philadelphia Solar Planning Project
Mary Beth Matteo, Jim Lanaghan, Diane Rosenkaimer, Joanne Weller, Institute for Community Issues, 13^2 Porter St.^ Philadelphia, Pa.
Jim Westkott, University of Colorado Dave Hill, U. of Colorado
Tom Lent, National Solar Heating and Cooling Information Center Office of Housing and Community Development, City of Philadelphia Brookhaven Institute, Brookhaven, N.Y.
Mid-Atlantic Solar Energy Association, Philadelphia City of Philadelphia Planning Commission Neal Hatcher, N.J. Solar Coalition
Comprehensive Community Energy Management Program, City of Philadelphia James Easterling, Department of Energy, Solar Applications, Wash.,D.C. Institute for the Study of Civic Values Tom Giller, Center for Renewable Resources, Wash., D.C.


Bibliography
The Application of Solar Technology to Today's Energy Needs,
Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress Baker A Denver Neighborhood Solar Energy Retrofit Project,
University of Colorado at Denver
Housing in Philadelphia; Trends Influencing the Philadelphia Housing Market, City Planning Commission
How to Use Solar Energy Without Getting Burned, by Malcolm Wells Issues for the 1980's, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Land Use and Environmental Impacts of Decentralized Solar Energy Use, University of California, Berkeley, in cooperation with the Lawrence- Berkeley Labs
NPAC Review of the DPR, Solar Energy Research Institute, Golden, Co.
The Peoples of Philadelphia, Allen Davis and Mark Haller Philadelphia Energy Projections, Dr. Brian Butz of CCEMP Philadelphia Solar Planning Project's Neighborhood Energy Analysis Kit, and Report on Incentives The Private City, Samuel Bass Warner
Tract Group Data Profile 1978, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Workshop Manual om Technical. Economic, and Legal Considerations for Evaluating Solar-Heated Buildings, Franklin Research Center, Phila.


PREFACE
I believe that the requirements of a STUDIO 3 are twofold: to demonstrate knowledge and skill acquired in the graduate program and to improve upon disciplines in which the student is remiss0 This is my framework for the undertaking of this document.
I also believe that the underlying challenge of a thesis is to springboard into something deeper specifically, the concept of a generalized scheme: to promote an awareness of the existence of reasoning about ends as well as reasoning about means. It is a lack of such an awareness which has been, unfortunately, a prime generator of our nation's past and present energy policy. However, local and state initiatives are beginning to play a role in the direction of our national energy policy, with the operation of many new funding programs as a result Residential Conservation Services, Community Energy Efficiency, etc. Much of this recent recognition of the role of local and state entities by the federal government can be attributed to the public's recognition of the inherent dangers of many conventional forms of energy. At the same time, we are demanding of our government and private energy suppliers to seek out the possibility of renewable energy resources, which by their nature are decentralized and in need of local support.
Toward that end, the Carter administration on June 20, 1979 announced the results of the Domestic Policy Review (DPR) of solar energy. The DPR results include a new and substantial goal that the nation obtain 2C$ of its energy from the sun by the year 2000. The DPR also includes a set of proposed federal actions to move the commercial use of solar energy toward that goal.


Research indicates that the most frequently cited barriers to the utilization of solar energy are: economic, regulatory, social, and educational (includes lack of public information).
Social and educational barriers should be confronted at the neighborhood level; this study proposes to do that, as v/ell as to utilize the existing and proposed federal commercialization programs to move some components of the study into implementation. In effect, then, this document represents a first step in the creation of a generalized scheme regarding energy provision in south Philadelphia and the role of the urban planner in effectuating that scheme.


OVERVIEW
In STUDIO 2, Baker*s Place in the Sun," our study team concluded that on-site renewable resources applications in an urban setting are technologically, physically, and socially feasible. Due to time limitations and a lack of consistent data, the team did not examine the issue of cost-effectiveness. That issue, ie, the integration of technological feasibility and cost-effectiveness of on-site renewable systems (specifically domestic hot water heating) is the central one of this thesis.
This issue will be examined in the following orders
I. Background on the Study Area I selected this study area after consulting my former colleagues at the Office of Housing and Community Development, who suggested I contact the Institute for Community Issues, 13^2 Porter St. In cooperation with that agency's senior staff, a scope of services was drawn which was of benefit
to myself and to the Institute, which is presently seeking funds to retrofit its office space and become the solar clearinghouse for all of south Philadelphia.
South Philadelphia is a good target area for many reasons: it is socially and economically diverse; it has a high residential density; there is no solar activity at the present time; the housing stock is old but generally well kept, and so on. In sum, it offers both a high challenge and a high potential for solar application.
II. The Study Area
(a) Physical
(b) Social
(c) Economic
(d) Cultural


111. Neighborhood Energy Analysis
(a) Introduction
(b) Summary of Approach
(c) Presentation of Energy Analysis Tables
(d) Application of the Approach
The Neighborhood Energy Analysis is described in some detail in Chapter 111 and in full in Appendix A.
This method of analysis was developed by the Philadelphia Solar Planning Project, which is directed by Dr. Charles Burnette, AIA.
The project has been supported by a grant from the Design Arts Program, National Endowment for the Arts, through a cooperative arrangement with the Conservation and Solar Application Division, United States Department of Energy. The project has been administered by the University City Science Center, Philadelphia.
I selected this method because of its high specificity in analyzing consumption patterns and because it included figures for energy saving for every likely insulation, conservation, and solar application. It is thus an excellent framework because it is adaptable to the needs and capabilities of any homeowner or renter.
Also, I was assured by the other primary actors in the solar energy movement in Philadelphia, such as the Mid Atlantic Solar Energy Association, the Comprehensive Community Energy Management Program (Argonne Labs) and the National Solar Heating and Cooling Information Center, that this method was the best available as a framework for energy conservation at the neighborhood level.
Included as well in Chapter 111 are Tables 3-^ through 3-7 which are the results of a methodology developed by the Brookhaven


Laboratory. This method is not analyzed because it is not as accurate or specific as the Solar Planning Project data. It is included, however, to note its format and general availability for any study area in the country to provide reasonable figures on energy consumption when time is a limiting factor.
IV. RSVP The Residential Solar Viability Program
(a) Introduction
(b) Explanation of Inputs
(c) Assumptions
(d) Copy of Printout
(e) Printout Analysis
The RSVP program was developed by Booz-Allen Associates under contract to HUD to determine the life-cycle cost feasibility of solar systems. I have included an RSVP printout on the life-cycle cost feasibility of solar domestic hot water systems (DHW), run on my behalf by Tom Lent of the National Solar Heating and Cooling Information Center.
V. Review of State, Federal, and Local Incentives
The Review of Incentives is included for a general and specific reason. The general reason is that this document can now serve as a hands-on indicator of programs currently available for renewable resource application; the specific reason is that, while this document focuses on DHW in its implementation strategy, the local reviewers will be aware of proper funding sources for other applications which may be considered.
VI. Implementation Strategy
Notei Although the Implementation Strategy is limited to DHW


(as is the RSVP), it is important to bear in mind that the data developed through Chapter 111 can be applied to any renewable
resource


benefit from the institutions of free enterprise and private property
B. South Philadelphia
South Philadelphia's unique social role in the metropolis was to serve as a port of entry for poor immigrants and blacks and as a refuge for the poor of the city in general. It was the home of Philadelphias ghettos. Moreover, because south Philadelphia was a peninsula no middle class commuters passed through the district on their way to the outer suburbs.
Isolation from the main flow of Philadelphia life helped the neighborhoods of south Philadelphia to maintain a separate identity. Isolation bred parochialism and the shelter of insulated ghettos within which, at least when he returned home at night, the newcomer could learn American urban culture while living among his fellow beginners with whom he shared a common language, experience, and church The role of south Philadelphia as a place where poor people and working-class people could make a stable family life and a stable set of neighborhood relationships was reflected in the settled residence patterns of its inhabitants. In 1930 in comparison
to the other districts of the city, it had the smallest population of
2
people who changed their homes within a year.
Stability, parochialism, family ties, the friendships and loyalties of the gang, the street, and the saloon, all were necessities
to help bolster the families and individuals of south Philadelphia, against the successive crises of poverty. South Philadelphia was
the place where many were introduced to the life of the modern industrial metropolis; it was the place where many found a poor man's accomodation to that life; and it was, perhaps, a place where many found refuge from that life.^


. ------, w
upbringing, Angelo Dundee was
saying the other day. "We were such a crazy mixture of-ethnic backgrounds. Italian, Jewish,' 'Polish, Irish, you name it. But'ev- erybody there communicated with everybody Everybody was friends, wejwere aUJike paisanos. ^ "Every, morning Id walk* from-my house at 829 Morris Street to - - ; ghandl would stop
les because all the ; the neighborhood
Southern
maybe 2
-, r. ~
people
would be out early in themorning ing l their white- marble steps and 5 knew every one of
"It taught me that each individual is different. And that you get
Many of south Philadelphia's historical roots are still thriving today. The keynote to this continuity is pride and a sense of iden-
Jr* "J1 4; "bj
tity, most notable in the white ethnic communities. The residents here enjoy a sense of historic place, and a tradition of productivity and self-sufficiency.
This pride and strength has created the extended family system which goes well beyond blood relationships; it exists in the ethnic parishes, in block groups, civic organizations, local sports teams, and corner bars. To many, it is the ideal working-class neighborhood. The city's south Philadelphia area planner describes the area as one which offers a full and complex existence which few residents choose to leave. He also notes that this nurturing quality breeds a unique kind of individual who has adapted to it (south Philly life) and would likely feel insecure moving out of it.


FOOTNOTES
1. "The Peoples of Philadelphia", Davis and Haller, p. 175
2. "The Private City", Warner, p. 185
3. ibid, p. 187


PHILADELPHIA CENSUS TRACTS
PMILAOCL^HtA cr, r PLANNING COMMISSION
* i ~A'l
2.


PHJLADELPH1A CENSUS TRACTS
'I.-'
PWM.ACCLPMIA CITY PLANNING* COMMISSION W&rZ,
tl
i *r ,v
140
J if* A * I 7 ** V- >* V / n/ ae V / lt> I /

IPj
*9
4- *.


11. The Study Area
The study area proper, which is bounded by Mifflin St. south to the Walt Whitman Approach, and Broad St. east to the Delaware River, was selected in cooperation with the Institute for Community Issues, a non-profit organization with a major emphasis on economic development and employment issues.
As mentioned in the Overview, the Institute intends to provide information and technical assistance in energy conservation matters. The Institute will utilize this study as a base assessment of sites suitable for renewable resource applications and in selection of a new energy-efficient headquarters.
The social description of south Philadelphia already given also applies to most of the study area. To further clarify this analysis, the study area will be described by neighborhoods, of which there are four. Also, please see the Appendix Tables (end of section) for a
more detailed description of the area.
*, '
The area north of Snyder Avenue, between Front and 4th Sts., is known as Pennsport and encompasses most of Census Tract 42. The area core is residential, with commercial activity along Snyder Avenue and mixed uses (Mostly industrial) along Front St. The housing quality is excellent good construction, design, and maintenance although the units were built prior to 1920. The area is white ethnic (mostly Slavic), blue collar and stable. South of Snyder Avenue to Oregon Avenue, and from Front to 4th Sts., is the Whitman neighborhood. It is the remaining portion of Tract 44. As the Appendix Tables document, there are marked similarities between Whitman and Pennsport. Again, the entire inner area is residential, with commercial and industrial activity alongr Snyder and Oregon and


Fronto Interior commercial or industrial activity is mostly limited to mom and pop stores, bars, and very light industry, such as garages. Whitman is "a success story as an urban renewal project."^- Over 600 loans and or grants for home improvement have been awarded in this neighborhood of 2500 homes. There has been private new construction of over 50 units as well during the past 10 years.
Actually, Whitman homes are of generally inferior quality to the neighboring Pennsport units. In fact, housing below Oregon Avenue is built on a landfill which at one time separated the Navy Base from the city. Ironically, these southernmost homes, built on a dump site, are the ones with the highest market value in all of Whitman and Pennsport. This is due in large part to their
. 5- ' 7-. - V t .
location away from Greenwich, a traditionally black area bounded by Mifflin and Wolf, 4th and 9th Sts. Whitman is almost wholly white ethnic, except for the northwestern corner of the neighborhood. The residents of Whitman are emphatic about remaining so (see clippings), but construction has just begun on the Whitman Park Homes, a 120 unit low-income^housing site at Front and Oregon Sts. ~
Greenwich, located at the intersection of Census Tracts 4l, 42, 44, and 45, is characterized by deteriorated and abandoned housing and a devastating unemployment rate. Because its 20 block area falls over four Tracts, data specific to the neighborhood is difficult to attain. However, a windshield survey alone would verify the general grim perception of the area. It is not dead, but it is severely blighted.
The area is predominantly residential late 1920s, early 1930s rowhomes but a major commercial strip does run through


By Jan Schaffer -
Inquirer Staff Writer
US. District,------------- J . ...., .. -1SPL . HPjBBH
Broderick yesterday: ordered a 12- opposed to the project, but we re not V Threatening or harming the block area of Whitman Park roped' going to go out and Jbreak. the-law constrncfiqn workers.. , 1
off from all but a handful of demon--- either. " t J Damaging property at. the. con- ,
strators when construction begins Persons, violating-the order could structionsite.. , .
Tuesday on the Whitman Park town-1 be arrested by U S. marshals and, if r, Blocking deliveries to the site, house project,-a- 4 convicted, could face fines or impns- ; Entering^ the site_without per- S
The judge imposed strict limita-,.onment. 'V
tions on picketing-but permitted one. The order will be; in'effect: for 10. tfhe judge also peradtted-the US informational picket to be posted days, A hearing on an injunction to marshal to deputize- Philadelphia .^ near each of the 10 entrances to the make the order permanent is sched- police officers assigned to guard the construction siteVat Front Street and<:,*uled for March 19. ; ? site.
Oregon Avenue, where 120v. town- h. -Underthe terms of theoider, other The judge imposed the limitations' i houses for.low-income persons are to pickets would be; permitted behind on. demonstrations idler attorneys
iijacr v --- - ----jj---r-----------
he built. barriers at a parking lotat a former for prospective tenants-of theJowiK
.Those pickets'would not bepermit--,:. Pantry ,Pridh supermarket inside the -. houses rejiorted that.a project super-'-, ted.to block,the entrances, but would n-blocl^area^unded.byrJohmstonj^^1-'-
' be allowed JB I with workers entering or leaving the £ site for no more than one miiiute, the judge said. ... . / -
The court deems (the order* necessary to preserve the peace and -prevent violence with the-minimum, possible disruption to the. daily lives ofijthe residents- of the area while permitting alLpersons the free exercise of.. their- First "Amendment rights, the judge said.
-
The order goes into effect at-mid-night Sunday. Contractors said they;
. expect to start'construction on Tuesday.
' v &
Joseph-Gindhart^the attorney .for the Whitman Area, Improvement-; Council,.which represents neighbor-.
. hood residents wild'-have bitterly -opposed tlie,^project for,the last. 20-years, ~said,.he. would ask the, U.S.
.. XhirdCircuLt Cburfcof-Appeals for an immeSfate'. Heanng/orr Broderickjs-,
^.Jbe -preside:
the.VWhitmanf
intendent, was threatened bloodshed by residents.in Jagnaty.
X
By Edgar Williams .V
Inquirers

;-T
H^i - _
said-.She had-so much energy, and she was always doing things to help other people, and all of a sudden] /It was a day suited to the mood. shes gone)-:,,
- i Rain had begun, early, and it wept ,.jt ;ust doesnt seem fair, a. man down the'glass cheeks of the church ^ goes through all those
windows as mourners gathered to year^ and she gets t0 be 70, and tben bid a final farewell to Marion Carr. - sfae djes jj^e she did. The man shook
- They stood .in small groups on the jdshead_/m never understand it sidewalk in front of Our Lady of a widow who lived in the
' Mount ^Carinel: Roman Catholic;., iM:.0f.Gladstone Street, was Church in South Philadelphia yester- shotto death last Thursday night day morning, awaiting the conclu- 'wjjj]eresting after, a march" to raise sion.of a Mass being, offered in toe : ^oney- for legal feesrfor residents"
; church so that they.could enter and : ?rrested for allegedly^violating vi i attend a Mass of Christian Bunal tor federal cd^rt order Hgijting pickets MarionCarr. , at the Whitmam;P^'Construction;}
- While, they waited; rain dripping
from- umbrellas, they spoke of Ma- .
rion Carr, who had been their friend
and neighbor in Whitman and who suddenly andvviolently had been
taken fromthem^;. >
woman
M-m -m -
farrSchaffer
r* Staff Wm*r
hitman residents said yesterday they ^had had nothing but'a mdly and brief conversation in rr th the construction super-,
h for the Whitman Park
itouuoc project, who testified that e residents had warned of blood-lif-the houses were built.
At no time did I ever make any 'threats to Mr. (Adam) Bantner or threaten bloodshed as he is now alleging, Fred Druding, president of the Whitman Area Improvement Council, testified at a hearing before U.S. District Judge Raymond J. Broderick.
Broderick is considering whether to permanently prohibiting all but a handful of pickets at the construe-
tion site-. /k The developer has urged that pickets be limited, arguing that Bantner, a supervisor for Jolly Co. Inc., the Baltimore-based:..- contractor, was confronted by_at least 20-local residents who threatened to halt the project-, by, bombing or bloodshed, when he first visited the South Philadelphia site.. r ": V ,
Police inspector George Fencl,
head of the citys civil-affairs un to testify today on a plan that tei rarily allows only 10 informati pickets within 12 blocks ofthesil Druding and Whitman Park dents who met with Bantner in J ary vowed that they would not b the law, but would continue tc pose the low-income developn which they have bitterly opposei 20years. . |


it along ?th St. Public initiatives in Greenwich have been virtually nil, but there is public recognition of the need to bolster the ?th St. commercial strip. Also, seven houses have been targeted for rehabilitation and re-sale by the city, in hopes of spurring some private sector activity in the area.
The remainder of the study area, Census Tracts ^0, ^5* ^3 and most of kl, is undesignated but commonly known as "Little Italy" or the heart of south Philadelphia. This is roughly 10th St. west to Broad, and Snyder south to Oregon.
The housing stock of Little Italy is also predominantly late 1920's and early 1930's brick rowhomes. Physically, the area is dense and unalleviated. Rowhouses of 30 units/acre prevail (actually, this density is common throughout the study area). The area planner believes that in Little Italy this density reflects an "architectural attitude" of preference as it intensifies the existing good sense of neighborhood. This attitude also results in homeowner "over-
investment", ie, beyond market value. While virtually indistinguish-
W; |f! '
able from the street, these homes are often unique inside, reflecting the individual homeowners' tastes.
Commercial activity in the area again focuses on the perimeter, particularly Broad St. to the west and Snyder Avenue along the northern edge. Broad St. is also the city's major north-south transportation corridor, and the uses which adorn it are readily comparable to those along Colfax in Denver.
Transportation for the study area is a mixed bag. The Broad St. subway line was extended south in 1971 to accomodate Veterans Stadium patrons and immediately became the most popular means of downtown transportation for Little Italy residents. Further east


in the study area, residents must rely on buses and the picturesque
(and incredibly slow) trolley cars for public transportation.
One major highway improvement has dealt a real blow to the area. I refer to Interstate 95 (circa 1975)# the urban construction of which sent shock waves through the riverfront residents of Whitman and Pennsport as it diagonally tore apart these neighborhoods. This expressway has literally severed the extended family system for some, and displaced and disgruntled many others.
In summation, however, it may be said that the study area for the most part is thriving. Services are excellent, transportation is adequate to good, and housing units are generally sound. Again, the Appendix Tables offer a more in-depth analysis and verification of the study findings.


FOOTNOTES
1. Jeremy Alvarez, Area Planner, City of Philadelphia


The following two neighborhood maps (the first is the Whitman area) are presented to give the reader a better indication of the housing density discussed in the preceding section. Unfortunately, maps of this scale were not available for Little Italy, but the density is basically the same.


^ sP* i f^!8 S1H THS §pqn I--------------1
112 100*




Neighborhood improvement Area
Loan/Grant Properties
Site Improvements
Community Sponsored Projects
Properties Rehabilitated
Properties to be Rehabilitated


LMJ




APPENDIX TABLES SECTION 11


TABLE 2-1 HOUSING DATA
ENSUS TRACT
H-U
41
42 44
> '
48
TOTALS
Total Number of Units % Owner-Occupied
1223 1222. 1260
3997 4262 4270 80.2
5310 5596 5728 68.1
3906 4053 4512 81.9
437 453 443 84.9
1371 1418 1323 90.1
197 253 199 87.4
15,218 16,035 16,475
Median Value (1970) #11,000
$8400
$7800
$9300
. { >
i ; '
$13,200
$21,100


TABLE 2-1 HOUSING DATA CONT
NSUS TRACT % Vacant Units fo Units Lacking Plumbing % Overcrowded
40 197 1.0 I960 3.6 1970 1.4 I960 1.7 1220 4.i i960 4.6
41 4.1 4.4 0.8 1.1 ' 6.3 5.9
42 2.0 2.9 0.7 1.4 6.7 5.9
44 3-3 1.6 0.2 0.0 5.9 \ 7.6
45 0.5 2.0 0.4 0.0 - 00 2.5
48 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.0 2.4 2.6


TABLE 2-2 POPULATION DATA
Total Population White Black Other %Non-white
1970 i960 70 60 '70 *60 '70 60 ?0 60
.6 .3
13,074 14,372 13,001 14,336 32 13 r~ 'l 23
17,437 18,671 14,541 16,493 2807 2113 89 40
12,759 15,081 12,681 14,863 26 182 52 36
1422 1584 1 IO67 1277 342 302 13 5
4186 4293 4174 4287 1 0 11 6
800 ?21 800 721 0 0 0 0
16.6 11.7
.6 1.4
25.0 19.4
.3 .1
0.0 0.0


Di US
40
41
42
44
45
4S
TABLE 2-3 EMPLOYMENT DATA
TRACT
% Employed In*
Labor Force Unemployment Rates
Construction Manufacturing Trade Services Total Male Female
6.8
42.2
20.5 30.5
3.4 3.2 3.6
7.6 4l.l 23.2 28.0 4.3 5.0 ; 3.2 \ \
6.0 49.1 18.0 26.8 3-1 3.5 2.4
5.9 46.7 21.5 25.9 11.7 13.5 \ 00
3.6 ^7.3 24.2 24.9 3.2 3.^ 2.7
1.6
38.8 28.9 30.7
7.5 10.1 3.6


TABLE 2 4 INCOME DATA
JS TRACT - Median Family Income ^Families Below Poverty
192.2 1260 1970
40 $9186 $5 80? 7.2
41 $8348 $5228 13.9
42 $9218 $5619 8.3
44 $7900 $5718 230
45
$9652 $6131
6.2
48
$11,489 $6294
2.1


111. Neighborhood Energy Analysis
A. Introduction
The Neighborhood Energy Analysis represents, primarily, the application of the Philadelphia Neighborhood Energy Planning Kit to the study area. This methodology, developed by the Philadelphia Solar Planning Project*, was chosen for many reasons.
First, the principal objective of this methodology is in line with a principal objective of this reports to analyze neighborhood energy consumption characteristics to identify possible energy programs, and to estimate their potential impact on neighborhood energy consumption.
Second, the process is in itself attractive for many reasons: .... the process is valuable in assisting energy planning at the neighborhood level
.... no great level of organization is required to use this process, and there is little cost involved. The information produced can be useful in obtaining appropriate support once objectives are defined ....the process relies on easily obtainable public census data and data from tax file records
.... the process includes all reasonable insulation measures as a precondition to the use of solar
.... the process permits the analysis of as few or as many energysaving measures as desired
.... the authors of this process are based in Philadelphia and are on hand to lend assistance in its application to the study area.
* This ad hoc organization is funded through the National Solar Cities Demonstration Act to provide technical assistance to all levels of government and to the private sector in the Philadelphia area. The organization is headed by Charles Burnette, Architect.


B. Summary of Approach
The Neighborhood Energy Analysis technique devised by the Philadelphia Solar Planning Project uses available data to produce estimates of the possible energy savings that a neighborhood could achieve by improving the efficiency of existing heating systems, by adding weatherization, or by installing solar energy systems where they would be most effective. This technique will be used in this report to identify likely sites for the installation of domestic hot water heating systems.
By taking into account census information about a neighborhood, as well as tax file information about the building stock, the method provides a way to tailor energy saving programs to the circumstances of a community.If, for example, the analysis technique locates a block of north-south running rowhouses with flat roofs, a co-operative purchase and installation of active domestic hot water systems could be proposed.
Here is how the analysis technique works: data from the housing survey of the federal census, the city tax file, and the Sanborn maps (available at the City Planning Commission) are entered on a worksheet (Table 3 1) The worksheet displays a breakdown of the neighborhood's building types into the lh most common residential tax file categories. Based on data from these sources, the number of each building type is further broken down according to heating level used, whether roofs are flat or sloped, levels of insulation, age, how many are end row homes or midrow homes, the orientations of exterior walls, how many are rented or owned by the resident, and the number of homes using a particular fuel to heat domestic hot
water


Using the results of calculations for typical Philadelphia homes developed by this method, energy demand for any given housing type is then calculated (Table 3 2). Assuming a typical heating system efficiency, the gross consumption of each heating fuel used in each housing type is estimated.
With these results it is possible to identify opportunities for significant energy savings within a neighborhood (Table 3 3) and to propose appropriate programs to bring about improvement in
heating system efficiency, additional weatherization, the install-
: 'A i :
ation of solar energy systems and other energy alternatives.


Process Outline
1. Enter population, density, household income and percentage of vacancy from census summaries.
2. Enter total counts of the 1k categories of row and semi-detached building types in the census tract from the computer tabulation of the tax file.
3. Estimate the number of each building type that are owner and renter occupied based on the census figures for units per structure.
Estimate the number of each type of rowhouse on the end of a row based on manual counts from Sanborn maps or aerial photographs.
5. Deduct end row counts from total counts for each row house type
' 'l'- ;$ ;
to obtain mid row totals.
. i vi - v
6. Estimate the relative age of each building type by occupancy
based on the census count and knowledge of the neighborhood.
g$
?. Estimate the number of buildings of each type with flat roofs based on knowledge of the neighborhood and reference to aerial
.
photographs.
8. Enter the totals of each building type facing south or southeast
f'P .
and the totals facing north or northwest from the computer tabulation or orientations calculated from the tax file.
9. Allocate the housing survey census totals for heating fuels by occupancy to each building type and identify each fuel count by "g" for gas, "o" for oil, and "e" for electricity.
10. Enter the characteristic area for each housing type from the energy consumption work sheet.
11. Multiply the square footage by the btu/sq. ft./ degree day totals to determine total energy demand for the given housing type per degree day.


12. Multiply the above number by the number of degree days per
V
heating season ,^866 in Philadelphia, to get total heat loss for typical building of the specific building type.
13. Multiply the above number by the number of buildings in type to get total annual heat loss by type.
1^. Determine the fraction of the total number of each housing type for each fuel type and multiply to determine the btu equivalent consumption of each fuel for that housing type.
15. Enter the probable fuel system efficiency from the table pro-

vided and calculate the probable gross energy consumption of the given fuel.
16. Determine the impacts of a program to improve the operating
V. 1
efficiency of existing systems in a particular building type by
W
multiplying the potential systems efficiency by the estimated number
fl
of structures to be affected and substitute in 1^ above.
17 Determine the impacts of a program to improve the weatherization of a given housing type and size by determining the difference in btu/degree day to be achieved, multiplying by the units to be affected, and subtract from the appropriate product above.
Vi/- '
18. Determine the impacts of a program of solar applications applied to a given housing type by determining the difference in btu/degree day to be achieved by the application, multiply by the affected units and subtract from the appropriate product above.
For a thorough explanation of this approach, please see Appendix A.


C. The Energy Analysis Tables
Again, these Tables (1 3) are explained in full in Appendix
A, and briefly in the Summary of Approach earlier in this Chapter,
It is suggested that the reader review only briefly the Tables now presented due to the high specificity of the data, and that the reader refer to Appendix A for any further discussion of the process.
As noted earlier, Tables 3 ^ through 3 7 are tabulations of consumption data developed by the Brookhaven Laboratory for the same study area, and is included primarily to note its availability for any study area in the country.


D. Application of the Approach
Upon completion of the socio-economic analysis represented by
\
Chapter 11 and the Energy Analysis Tables of this Chapter it is now possible to proceed toward the application of this method. For purposes of developing a plausible strategy for the remainder of this document, the application analysis will be limited to domestic hot water (DHW) systems.
Please note (again) that this method can be adapted for the application of any insulation, conservation or solar measure. When funding for implementation does become available the proper conduit, assumedly the Institute for Community Issues or the Office of Housing and Community Development, will be in a position to examine any application proposed with the base data of Chapters 11 and 111 in hand.
The selection of DHW was made for several reasons:
.... The study area is dominated by flat-roofed structures, suitable for the mounting of collectors
v '
.... Installation is simple and can be accomplished by private contractors, block group co-ops, or by individual homeowners

.... .Total cost is low, and only minor preliminary conservation measures are recommended
-V >4 ' ' 'i ... *V r.
.... Relatively little collector space is necessary, but DHW provides high visibility and is thus a good introduction to solar activity .... DHW is used year-round
.... DHW requires little structural change relative to other solar
applications


IVo RSVP The Life-Cycle Cost Approach
A. Introduction
Despite little evidence of a solar market in the city, there is no grassroots resistance to solar.^ In an energy audit developed by the Philadelphia Solar Planning Project, homeowners were asked what effect they thought a solar energy system would have on the value of their home. Of those responding, 76$ felt that a solar energy system would increase the resale value of their home and 2^ thought that it would not.
This survey suggests that most homeowners would accept a solar energy system(s) if the front-end cost of a system were not prohibitive. The Residential Solar Viability Program RSVP was devel-oped specifically to demonstrate to homeowners as well as to public and private decisionmakers the true (life-cycle) cost of solar energy systems. Please see Appendix B for a full description of the RSVP.
i >_V - .t $'':)/
The life-cycle cost for a system is the accumulated costs over
the life of the system. Solar heating system costs include (1) cap-

ital and installation costs, or principal and interest on money borr-

owed to pay for the installed system, (2) property tax increase,
: . ; ; r\l,
(3) insurance premium increase, (^) fuel cost for the auxiliary
! t ! .... : ,u 9M' -
/* '*r
unit, and (5) operating and maintenance costs. Heating costs for non-solar systems is primarily fuel costs? capital and operation and maintenance costs are usually small, although depreciation and replacement costs are substantial.
When comparing two systems with different items of costs, such as a non-solar system with annual fuel cost that increases each year and a solar system having high capital costs (or annual costs which are made up of mortgage payments) and reduced annual fuel costs, comparison of life-cycle costs for the two systems is appropriate.


f
The yearly costs for a residential solar heating system is:
Yearly cost with solar = mortgage payment + auxiliary fuel cost + property tax increase + insurance premium increase + operating costs + maintenance cost, minus: income tax savings for interest and taxes paido
Yearly cost for a non-solar system is: fuel cost + operating and maintenance costs + depreciation.
s
*
Jj
#
m
*# ft.-


Bo Explanation of Inputs (Please see P. 7 of Appendix B for full listing).
The following key figures were developed with the assistance of the RSVP programmer,(Tom Lent of the National Solar Heating and Cooling Information Center) and Charles Burnette Associates.
.... Building Size* 1500 square feet. This is larger than the most common building type in the study area, the two story brick row home, but it is smaller than all other building types and should therefore be close to the average size for the faiaily of four.
.... Collector Size: 63 square feet this should provide a 69#
'
solar contribution for the above-sized unit Back-Up Efficiency: 55#
o


Co Assumptions
One difficult assumption which must be made in a life-cycle
\
cost comparison is, of course, the rate of increase of the real cost of conventional energy. For example, conventional energy cost is usually determined without proper tribute to social and environmental effects and is rarely determined by eventual replacement cost. Further, recent history dictates that the rate of escalation and fluctuation in price is inestimable.
A conventional energy cost scenario is a vital ingredient in the RSVP, however. Thus, after much consultation and debate with Mr. Lent, members of the Solar Planning Project, and Public Utility representatives, the rate of 15$ annual increase was selected.for each energy type.
It is the consensus opinion of the above group that this figure is low, based on recent escalations (example: electricity 100$ in a 13 month period in Philadelphia) and the general volatility of the conventional energy picture today. But in understating the probable increase in the cost of conventional a clearer statement is made regarding the impact which public policymakers can create with variables under their commands. Two such variables were singled out and entered into the RSVP rum a 100$ property tax exemption and below market loans of 8,75% over 15 years (presently available in N.J.).
We also priced the DHW system a shade high to reflect present cost of living trends. However, if systems are purchased co-operatively and installed by a co-op (see next page for an example), costs can be trimmed by as much as 5C$ Again, the variables can always be updated to reflect both recent and regional differences.


The Solar Coop is a group of friends, associates and/or new aquaintances who get together to buy and to install solar domestic hot water systems and thereby reduce their installed price to about 31,320.00.
-
You don't need to know plasmaphysics to do it, just need a sense of dedication and humor.. Your time in doing this is worth almost $100.00 a day in savings and you get all the warrantees applicable for top quality equipment.
If this sounds strange, STOP. If you're this special kind of person and are ready for high quality cost effective solar, here is a way to get your money's worth.


D. Copy of the Printout
The Printout is included in its entirety to aid the reader in an understanding of the RSVP.
The first section includes a property tax rate of 6.2# with 0# exemption for solar, and a five year loan at 17%> annual. At the time of this writing, there is no property tax exemption for solar in Pennsylvania or loans available at a reduced rate of interest.
The second section demonstrates the effect of a 100# solar exemption on property tax, and a 15 year loan at only 8.75# The impact of these incentives is discussed in the Analysis of the Printout .
%-W, ' : i W
' V- A&.. ... ,*% * ' - K -J V ,J>


SECTION 1
COMMAND: >ch 66
. 56)PROPERTY TAX RATE >6.175 COMMAND:
>r econ
1.50 7.
YOU ENTERED 6.17 % FOR PROPERTY TAX RATE
THIS VALUE IS HIGHER THAN NORMAL BASED ON YOUR OTHER INPUTS'. TYPE "OK" OR ENTER -A NEW VALUE.
>ok
COLL vis AREA
V 0:* t- -
: SYS PRICE
YRS TO YRS TO PAY + CASH RCOVR DP* BACK
63.
;-v /ft:


3
, .6? V 3226...
.. 9 - - ; V
11
11
NPV
20 YRS
2703..
IRR
-* -j
' -i
20.3?
V
jj. '
7 1,
i -. %
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 X DISCOUNT LOAN TERMS:- 5 YEARS AT 17.007. INTEREST WITH 07. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6-27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX .07.
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING- TAX SAVINGS
.,. - i j. . .
COLLECTOR UNSPECIFIED. AVERAGE PERFORMANCE VALUES USED
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR: HOT WATER ONLY
COLLECTOR AREA: 63 SQUARE FEET
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $ 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SQ FT
BACKUP WATER HEATER* ELECTRIC
BACKUP SPACE HEAT?' ELECTRIC FURNACE
AIR CGNDITIONING^SYSTEM: NONE
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION: PHILADELPHIA : PA
TYPE'OF BUILDING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING:- - 1500-SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION- 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR
1MAND:
>r cash
HOW MANY YEARS? >10


ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
t i LOAN ADDITIONAL COSTS i. j TOTAL * SAVINGS- TOTAL * TOTAL-?
REAL HAZARD MORTG INCOME NET CUM*
YR PMT EST TX INSUR INSUR MAINT COSTS UTIL - TAX SAVING SAVING SAVING
0 0.
1 962. 199. 0. 0. 25. 1136. 252. 214. 466.. -720. -720.
2 962. 213. 0. 0. 27. 1202. 290. 1484. 1774. 572. -148.
3 962. 228. 0. 0. 29. 1219. 334. 169. 503. -716. -364.
4 962. 244. 0. 0. 31. 1237- 384. 139. 523. -714. -1578.
5 962. 261. 0. 0. 33. 1256. 441. 103. 544. -712. -2289.
6 0. 279. 0. Vv- 0. 35. 314. 507.. 84. : 591. 277. -2013.
7 0. 299. 0. 0. 33. 336.- 584.- 90. 673. 337. . -1678.
3 0. 320. ..0. : 0- '7 40. 360. 671. 96. 767. 407'r -1269.
9 0. 3 342. 0. 0. 43. 385. - 772. 103. 374. 489;' -730.
10 0. 366. 0. v 0. 46. 412. 887. 110. 997. 585, -195.
4810. 2752. 0. 0. 345. 7903.: 5122. 2591. 7714. -195.
* **#*#**#* ****#*#* *****************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND' ESCALATION 6.3 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE'HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX '" .07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED)- FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
J * . - * . *
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION:- PHILADELPHIA- PA
TYPE OF BUILDINGS - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDINGS-- 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS?: " 4
COLLECTOR UNSPECIFIED. AVERAGE PERFORMANCE VALUES USED
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR: COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM? BACKUP WATER HEATER: BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM;
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET $ 3226 PLUS $
ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC FURNACE NONE
0 PER SO FT
COMMAND: ch 17


\ xJLm f \Jn+J
I I \ J. Vi-
>47.3
( 33)GAS ESCALATION TYPE 1.00
>1
' ^4)GAS ESCALATION RATE 7./YEAR
>
< 35) GAS EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY-' 55.00 7.
>
COMMAND:
>r econ cash
COLL SYS YRS TO YRS TO PAY NPV
AREA F PRICE + CASH RCOVR DP BACK 20 YRS IRR
63. .6? 3226. 7 1? 1? -1406. . 2.65
*#***5******************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 V. DISCOUNT LOAN TERMS: 5 YEARS AT 17.007. INTEREST WITH 07, DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX .07.
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
COLLECTOR UNSPECIFIED. SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:' COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEMs-BACKUP WATER HEATER: BACKUP SPACE HEAT:--AIR CONDITIONING'SYSTEM
AVERAGE PERFORMANCE' VALUES USED HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET
$ 3226 PLUS' $ 0 PER SQ FT
GAS
GAS FURNACE r.-.- NONE
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM'PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION: PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDINGS- 1500"SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS r 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND- ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR GAS PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 47.3 CENTS/THERM AT 15.07./YR
HOW MANY YEARS?
>r



ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
ADDITIONAL COSTS 1. i TOTAL SAVINGS- 1 i TOTAL TOTAL ! 1
LOAN REAL HAZARD MORTG INCOME NET CUM
PMT EST TX INSUR INSUR MAIN! COSTS UTIL TAX SAVING SAVING SAVINC
962. 199. 0. 0. 25. 1186. 109. 214. 323. 0. -S63.- -863.
962. 213. 0. 0. 27. 1202. 125. 1484. 1609. 407. -456.
962. 228. 0. 0. 29. 1219. 144. 169. 313. -906. -1362.
962. 244. 0. 0. 31. 1237. 166. 139. 305. -932. -2294.
962. 261. 0. 0. 33. 1256. 190; 103. 294. -962. -3256.
0. 279. 0. 0. 35. 314. 219. 34. 303. -12. -3263.
0. 299. 0. 0. 33. 336. 252. 90. 341. 5. -3263.
0. 320. 0. 0. 40. 360. 290. 96. 336. 26. -3233.
0. 342. 0. 0. 43. 385; 333. 103. 436. 50- -3137.
0. 366. 0. 0. 46. 412. 383. 110. 493. 81. -3106,
4810. 2752. 0. 0. 345. 7908. 2210. 2591. 4802. -3106.
************************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING-ASSUMPTIONS:
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX .07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT' INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307 TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
THERMAL LOADS BASED- ON HUD-MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATIONS' PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDING* SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING* 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS:' 4

COLLECTOR UNSPECIFIED. AVERAGE PERFORMANCE VALUES USED
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER?
BACKUP SPACE HEAT?
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM?
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SQ FT
GAS
GAS FURNACE NONE
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.S CENTS/KWH AT 15.07/YR GAS PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 47.3 CENTS/THERM AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.
COMMAND


' V
( 36)OIL PRICE CENTS/GALLON
100
( 37)OIL ESCALATION TYPE 1.00
>
>3) OIL ESCALATION RATE /./YEAR
>15
( 39)0IL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY1 55.00 7.
>
COMMAND:
>r econrcash
COLL SYS YRS TO YRS TO PAY NPV
AREA F PRICE + CASH RCOVR DP BACK 20 YRS- IRR
63. .69 3226. 6 15 15 152. 10.67
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 7. DISCOUNT LOAN TERMS: 5 YEARS AT 17.007. INTEREST WITH 07. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE- 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX - .07.
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED)- FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
COLLECTOR UNSPECIFIED. SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR: COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM:
AVERAGE PERFORMANCE VALUES USED HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET
$ 3226 PLUS 5 0 PER SQ FT
BACKUP WATER HEATERr BACKUP SPACE HEAT: -V AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM?
oil-
oil FURNACE NONE
THERMAL LOADS-BASED ON HUD MINIMUM^PROPERTY STANDARDS
LOCATION:
TYPE OF BUILDING: SIZE OF BUILDING: NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS:
PHILADELPHIA PA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 1500 SQUARE FEET 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CENTS/GALLON AT 15.07./YR
4 MANY YEARS?


ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN A- SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
------------ADDITIONAL COSTS---------------!------SAVINGS---------!----TOTAL---!
! !
YR LOAN PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD INSUR MORTG INSUR MAINT TOTAL COSTS UTIL INCOME TAX TOTAL NET SAVING SAVING CUM SAVING
0 1 962. 199. 0. 0. 25. 1136. 163. 214. 377. 0. -809v- -809.
2 962. 213. 0. 0. 27. 1202. 188. 1484. 1672. 470. -339.
3 962. 223. 0. 0. 29. 1219. 216. 169. 385. -834. -1173.
4 962. 244. 0. 0. 31. 1237. 248. 139. 387. -849-/ -2023.
5 962. i 261. 0. 0. 33. 1256. 2S5. 103. 389. -867. -2890.
6 0. * 279. 0. 0. 35. 314. 323. 84. 412. 93. -2792.
7 0. ? 299. 0. 0. r 38. 336. 378. 90. 467. 131. -2661.
3 0. 320. 0. 0. 40. 360. 434. 96. 530. 170. -2491.
9 0. 342. 0. 0. 43. 385. 499. 103. - 602. 217. -2275.
10 0. 366. 0. 0. 46. 412. 574. 110. 6S4. 272. -2003.
4310. 2752. 0. 0. 345. 7903. 3314. 2591. 5906. -2003.
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS!
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT: FROM- PROPERTY TAX .07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY £ n
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON- HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION* PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING* 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS* 4
COLLECTOR UNSPECIFIED;
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR* COLLECTOR AREA*
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
0 PER- SQ FT
JUL
OIL FURNACE NONE
AVERAGE PERFORMANCE VALUES USED HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.S CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CENTS/GALLOM AT 15.07.VYR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE' HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.
PfiMMAMn .


SUMMARY' INFORMATION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM FOR AN EXISTING HOME
LOCATED IN PHILADELPHIA PA
SYSTEM PRICE $ 3226.
DOWN PAYMENT < 77.) 226.
LOAN AMOUNT<15 YEARS AT- 8.757.) 3000.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT- 30.
FIRST YEAR UTILITY SAVINGS 138.
SOLAR CONTRIBUTION 69%
MONTHLY COSTS
YEAR 1 YEAR 8 YEAR 16
SOLAR NON-SOLAR SOLAR NON-SOLAR SOLAR NON-SOLAR
UTILITY COSTS - 127. 139. 336. 369. 1023. 1127
LOAN PAYMENTS PLUS -UTILITIES 157. -- 139. 366. 369. 102S. 1127
TAX SAVINGS 6. 0. 4. 0. 0. 0
TOTAL COSTS AFTER TAX SAVINGS 151. 139. 361. 369.- 1023. 1127
+ BUYER IS ENTITLED TO A FEDERAL INCOME TAX CREDIT OF UP TO + + $1290.t WHICH WOULD BE RECEIVED THE YEAR AFTER INSTALLATION +
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS TYPE OF BUILDING:- SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING: 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE) SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR' CONDITIONING STSTEM:
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ OIL
OIL FURNACE NONE
0 PER SO FT
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CENTS/GALLON AT 15.07./YR UTILITY COSTS INCLUDE SPACE HEATING,WATER HEATING r APPLIANCESr AND MAINTENANCE COSTS (SOLAR MAINTENANCE IS $ 25. PER YEAR)
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX 100.07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED! FOR


\v
r en^reconrcash
SECTION 2
ENGINEERING DATA SUMMARY
TOTAL HOT SPACE
INCIDENT WATER HEAT SOLAR
RADIATION LOAD LOAD CONTRIBUTION
(MMBTD) (MMBTU) (MMBTU)
JAN 1.652 1.553 15.809 377.
FEB 1.900 - 1.407 13.591 537.
MAR 2.520 1.553 11.176 637.
APR 2.715 1.503 5.723 797.
MAY 2.925 1.553 . 1.909 857.
JUN 2.947 EM7 1.503 .000- 917.
JUL 3.013-?-rr 1.553 .000 917.
AUG 2.947 ; 1.553 .000- 907.
SEP 2.671 1.508 .590 847.
OCT 9 2.471 1.553 : 3.875 727.
NOV 1.753 mm; 1.508 3.739 477.
DEC 1.450 .. /L- i : 1.553 14.405 307.
TOTAL 23.972 18.346 75.372 697.
ELECTRICITY GAS OIL
rmNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION 93.211 * .000 .000
WITHOUT SOLAR '(MMBTU)
ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION 85.553 .000 .000
WITH SOLAR* (MMBTU) ? <
BACKUP SYSTEMS 957.
ANNUAL EFFICIENCY :
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE! SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP HATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SO FT
ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC FURNACE NONE
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS
LOCATION:
LATITUDE:
TYPE OF BUILDING: SIZE OF BUILDING: NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS
PHILADELPHIA PA 39.33
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 1500 SQUARE FEET 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND
ivjn*r r fci
ESCALATION
thpi t me
6.3 CENTS/KUH
LlflT IJ^TET? A,\i,r
AT 15.0X/YR MEATIMG


COLL SYS YRS TO YRS TO PAY NPV
AREA F PRICE + CASH RCOVR DP BACK 20 YRS IRR
63. .6? 3226. 7 2 11 3434. 72.56
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING-ASSUMPTIONS:
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 7. DISCOUNT LOAtt TERMS: 15 YEARS AT 3.75% INTEREST WITH 77. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY'TAX .0%,
ASSUMES- 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
0 PER- SQ FT
V V
F-PRIME-R-UL
*F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL- INCIDENCE)
SOLAR ENERGY USED FORrx CCLLECTOR AREA?
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM?:
BACKUP WATER HEATER:'
BACKUP SPACE HEAT : v; v :
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION? ' PHILADELPHIA- PA
TYPE OF BUILDING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING:- :r 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS? - 4
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226- PLUS $ ELECTRIC
ELECTRiC FURNACE NONE
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH- AT 15.0%/YR

HOW MANY YEARS?
>10
ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
YR
ADDITIONAL COSTS------------!------SAVINGS-------\----TOTAL---
i ;
LOAN REAL HAZARD MORTG TOTAL
PMT EST TX INSUR INSUR MAINT COSTS
INCOME TOTAL' NET CUM UTIL TAX SAVING SAVING SAVIN


ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR- HOUSE
!-------------ADDITIONAL COSTS--------------!------SAVINGS---------!----TOTAL- !
I ! i . j
YR LOAN- PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD INSUR - MORTG INSUR MAINT TOTAL COSTS UTIL INCOME TAX TOTAL SAVING NET -SAVING CUM SAVING
0 1 ' 360; 199Y 0. ' 0; - - 25.' --534. 252. 137. 390. -226. -194; -420.
2 360. 213. 0. 0. 27. 600. 290. 1429. 1719. 1120. 699.
3 360.. 228. 0. 0. 29. 617. 334. 140. 474. -143. 557.
4 360. 244. 0. 0. 31. 634. 384. 142. 525. -109. 447.
5 360. 261. ~ 0. 0. 33. 654. 441. 143. 534. -69. 373.
6 360. 279. 0. 0. 35. 674. 507. 145. 652. -22. 356.
7 360. 299. 0. 0. 33. 696. 584. 146. 730. 34. 390.
8 360. 320. 0. 0. 40. 720. 671. 148. 319. 99. 439.
9 360. 342. 0. 0. 43. 745. 772. 150. 921. 176. 665.
10 360. 366. 0. 0. 46. 772. 887. 151. 1039. 267. 932.
3593. 2752. 0. 0. 345. 6696. 5122. 2731. 7354v 932.
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON:THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX ' .07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES' PRINCIPAL;AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL"AND STATE COMBINED} FOR CALCULATING TAX-SAVINGS
THERMAL LOADS BASED- ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION? PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDING?SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
1500-SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE! SOLAR ENERGY USED- FOR: COLLECTOR AREA?
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM? - $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING-SYSTEM?-
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $- 0 PER SQ FT
ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC FURNACE -NONE
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENT3/KWR AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE7 HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTEDFOR.
COMMAND: >ch 63:100 COMMAND: >rn\\ ch 63


63. .6? 3226. 223 5408. 129.20
************************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 Z DISCOUNT LOAN TERMS: 15 YEARS AT 8.757. INTEREST WITH 77. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR FXFMRJ FROM PROPERTY TAX 100.07.
ASSUMES 3&T. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED)- FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE)
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM? $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:' '
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS W
LOCATION: PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING: ' 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.3 CENTS/KWH- AT 15.07./YR
HOW MANY YEARS? >10
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SO FT
ELECTRIC
'mrmr furnace
NONE
ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
i-------------ADDITIONAL COSTS
i
LOAN PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD INSUR MORTG INSUR MAINT
0
1 360. 0. 0. 0. 25.
2 360. 0. 0. 0. 27.
3 360. 0. 0. 0. 29.
4 360. 0. 0. 0. 31.
i t TOTAL AVINGS- 1 TOTAL TOTAL---! i NET CUM
INCOME
COSTS UTIL TAX SAVING SAVING SAVING
335. 252. 73. 330. -226. -55. -29
337. 290. 1365. 1655. 1269.
383. 334. 72. 405. 17.
390. 384. 63. 452. 62.


ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
t
ADDITIONAL COSTS
SAVINGS
TOTAL!
i
LOAN PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD INSUR MORTG INSUR MAI NT TOTAL COSTS UTIL INCOME TAX TOTAL NET SAVING SAVING CUM SAVING
360. 0. 0. 0. 25. 385. 252. 73. 330. -226. -55. -231.
360. 0. 0. 0. 27. 337. 290. 1365. 1655. 1269. 983.
360. 0. 0. 0. 29. 333. 334. 72. 405. 17. 1005.
360. 0. 0. 0. 31. 390. 384. 68. 452. 62. 1067.
360. 0. 0. 0. 33. 393. 441. 65. 506. 114. 1180.
360. - 0. 0. 0. 35. 395. 507. 61. 563\ 173. 1354.
360. 0. 0. 33. 397. 534. 57. 640. 243. 1596.
360. 0. 0. 0. 40. 400. 671. 52. 723. 323. 1920.
360. 0. 0. 0. 43. 403. 772. 47. 319. 416. 2335.
360. 0. 0. 0. 46. 406. 387. 41. 929. 523. 2853:
3593. 0. 0. 0. 345. 3944. 5122. 1906. 7023. 2853.
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
OVERALL PROPERTr TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX 100.07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND-INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS

THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY5 STANDARDS
LOCATION?
TYPE OF BUILDING: SIZE OF BUILDING: NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS:
PHILADELPHIA PA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 1500 SQUARE FEET 4
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIHE-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE) SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA?
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:*
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SQ FT
ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC FURNACE NONE
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.3 GENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.


- TOTAL HOT SPACE
INCIDENT-- WATER HEAT SOLAR
RADIATION LOAD - LOAD CONTRIBUTION
(MMBTU) "CMMBTU) (MMBTU)
JAN 1.652 1.553 - 15.S09 377.
FEB 1.900 1.407 13.591 537.
MAR 2.520 1.553 11.176 687.
APR 2.715 1.508 5.723 797.
MAY 2.925 1.558 1.909 857.
JUN 2.947 1.508 .000 917.
JIJL 3.013 1.553 .000 917.
AUG - 2.947 1.553 .000 907.
SEP V 2.671 1.508 .590 847.
OCT 2.471 1.553 3.875 727.
NOV- v: 1.753 1.508 8.783 477
DEC v.r 1.450 1.553 14.405 307.
TOTAL 23.972 13.346 75.872 697.
ELECTRICITY GAS OIL
ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION- .000 171.305 .000
WITHOUT SOLAR*(MMBTU)
ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION .000 148.290 .000
WITH SOLAR (MMBTU)
BACKUP SYSTEMS 557.
NNUAL EFFICIENCY
******#****-******#*****#**#*******
THE ABOVE REPORT IS" BASED ON THE FOLLOWINC ASSUMPTIONS:
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL-INCIDENCE) SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: -BACKUP WATER HEATER r.
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM-
$
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ GAg
GAS FURNACE NONE
0 PER SQ FT
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUB MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION: PHILADELPHIA PA
LATITUDE: 39.83
TYPE OF BUILDING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING:: 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR GAS PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 47.3 CENTS/THERM AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.


-SsrJA
COLL SYS YRS TO YRS TO PAY NPV
AREA- F PRICE- + CASH RCOVR DP BACK 20 YRS ' IRR
63. .69 i 3226. 16 20 20 -676. 2.60
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 7. DISCOUNT LOAN TERMS: 15 YEARS AT S.757. INTEREST WITH 77. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX .07.
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
F-PRIflE-R-UL F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL IN gOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA?
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM?
BACKUP WATER HEATER?
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:....
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTE
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON LOCATION: -TYPE OF BUILDING?
SIZE OF BUILDING?
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS?
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.3 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR GAS PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 47.3 CENTS/THERM AT 15.07./YR
Huw HAwr itAro? >10
.S3 .76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SQ FT
GAS
GAS FURNACE NONE
- HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS PHILADELPHIA PA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 1500 SQUARE FEET 4
ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
1
YR
ADDITIONAL COSTS
i
f
SAVINGS
j

TOTAL---!

LOAN REAL HAZARD MORTG TOTAL INCOME TOTAL NET CUM
PMT EST TX INSUR INSUR MAINT COSTS UTIL TAX SAVING SAVING SAVIN!
0
-226


ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN"A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
i-------------ADDITIONAL COSTS--------------!------SAVINGS---------? __TOTAL *
! ! i !
YR LOAN PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD" INSUR MORTG INSUR MAINT TOTAL COSTS UTIL INCOME TAX TOTAL SAVING NET SAVING- CUM SAVING
0 1 360- 199. 0. 0. 25. 534. 109. 137. 246. -226. -338.. -564.
2 360. 213. 0. 0. 27. 600. 125. 1429. 1554. 955.- 391.
3 360. 223. - 0. 0. 29. 617. 144. 140. 284. oo£ 59.
4 360. 244. 0. 0. 31. 634. 166. 142. 307. -327. -269.
5 360-- 261. 0. 0. 33. 654. 190. 143. 334. -320. -589.
6 360. 279. 0. 0. 35. 674. 219. 145. 364-. -311. -899.
7 360.- - 299. 0. 0. 38. 696. 252. 146. 393. -298. -1197.
3 360. 320. 0. 0. 40. 720- 290. 143.- 433. -232; -1480.
9 360. 342. 0. 0. 43- 745. 333. 150. 433. -262.. -1742.
10 360.- 366- 0. 0. gfe, 46. 772- 383. 151. 534. -238. -1980.
3593. "2752. 0.' 0. 345. 6696. 2210. 2731. 4942*. -1930.
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27,
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX .07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 30X TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
THERMAL LOADS BASED- ON" HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATIONS PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDINGS - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDINGS'^"- 1500- SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
F-PRIME-R-UL -1' .83
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL- INCIDENCE) .76 SOLAR ENERGY USED' FOR: HOT WATER ONLY
COLLECTOR AREAS"
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE' HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SQ FT
GAS
GAS FURNACE NONE
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.3 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR GAS PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 47.3 CENTS/THERM AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.
COMMAND: >c h;68.
/


.. w AREA F PRICE + CASH hCUVft ur DMLr\ UV 1 l\v^ i <\>\
..Tv 63. .6? 3226. 10 11 14 129?. 57.66
****###*##**#*##*****#********#****
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 7. DISCOUNT LOAN TERMS* 15 YEARS AT S.757. INTEREST WITH 77. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY- TAX" RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT- FROM- PROPERTY TAX 100.07.
ASSUMES 30% TAX'BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED)- FOR CALCULATING-TAX SAVINGS
Iff
8
r. tV
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE) SOLAR ENERGY USED"FOR* *
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONtY-
COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: BACKUP WATER' HEATER BACKUP SPACE HEAT:-AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM^
- ? - m -
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD LOCATION*
TYPE OF BUILDING* : ~i.V. -
SIZE OF BUILDINGV-NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS *-
.
63 SQUARE FEET
$ 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SQ FT
GAS
SAS FURNACE NONE
MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS PHILADELPHIA-- PA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 1500 SQUARE FEET 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION
ION RATE
6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR 47.3 CENTS/THERM AT 15.07./YR

1 ; .
ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
|------------ADDITIONAL COSTS
i
YR LOAN PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD INSUR MORTG INSUR MAINT
0
1 360. 0. 0. 0. 25.
2 360. 0. 0. 0. 27.
3 360. 0. 0. 29.
i------SAVINGS---------\-----TOTAL---
i i .
TOTAL COSTS UTIL INCOME TAX TOTAL SAVING NET SAVING CU.V SAVIJ'
385. 109. 73. 186. -226. -193. -42'
337. 125. 1365. 1490. 1104. 6S£
383. 144. 72. 216. -173. 50:
/ / L rs -1


ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR- HOUSE
| ADDITIOiN IAL COSTS | AVINGS- | TOTAL---!
LOAN REAL HAZARD MORTG TOTAL INCOME TOTAL NET CUM
YR PMT EST TX INSUR INSUR MAINT COSTS UTIL TAX SAVING SAVING SAVING
0 -226.
1 360. 0. 0. 0. 25. 385. 109. 78. 186. -198. -424.
2 360. 0. 0. 0. 27. 337. 125. 1365. 1490. 1104. 6S0.
3 360. 0. 0. 0. 29. 388. 144. 72. 216. -173. 507.
4 360. 0. 0. 0. 31. 390. 166. 68. 234. -156. 350.
5 360. 0. 0. 0. 33. 393. 190. 65. 255. -137. 213.
6 360. 0. 0. 0. 35. 395. 219. 61. 280. -115. 98.
7 360. 0. 0. 0. 33. 397. 252. 57. 308. -89. 9.
8 360. 0. 0. 0. 40. 400. * 290. 52. 342. -53. -49.
9 360. 0. 0. 0. 43. 403. 333. 47. 330. -23. -72.
10 360. p 0. 0. 0. 46. 406. 333. 41 . 424. 19. -53.
3598. 0. 0. 0. 345. 3944. 2210. 1906. - 4116. -53.
*#****#*************#*******###***#
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY'TAX 100.0%
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR
CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
... ;
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION:- - PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE'OF BUILDING:------------ SINGLE FAMILY" DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDINGS-- 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER1 OF OCCUPANTS s 4
F-PRIME-R-UL--
F-PRIME-R-TAINORMAL INCIDENCE)
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA: ,
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:-'
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:'
.S3
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ GAS
GAS FURNACE NONE
0 PER SO FT
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.3 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR GAS PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 47.3 CENTS/THERM AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION- COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.
COMMAND:
>rh 97. Aft


ENGINEERING DATA SUMMARY
TOTAL HOT SPACE
INCIDENT WATER HEAT SOLAR
RADIATION LOAD LOAD CONTRIBUTION
(MMBTU) (MMBTU) (MMBTU)
JAN 1.652 1.553 15.309 377.
FEB 1.900 1.407 13.591 537.
MAR 2.520 1.553 11.176 687.
APR 2-715 1.503 5.728 797.
MAY . 2.925 1.553- 1.909 857.
JUN . 2.947 1.508 .000 917.
JUL 3.013 1.553 .000 917.
AUG 2.947 1.553 .000 907.
SEP 2.671 1.508 .590 847.
OCT 2.471 1.558 3.375 727.
novt - H753 ~ ~ 1.508 8.7S9 477.
DEC 1.450 1.558 14.405 307.
TOTAL 23.972 18.346 75.872 697.
i ELECTRICITY GAS OIL
ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION utthOUT SOLAR (MMBTU) .000 . 000 171.305
ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION WITH SOLAR (MMBTU) .000 .000 143.290
BACKUP SYSTEMS 557.
ANNUAL EFFICIENCY
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE) SOLAR ENERGY USED FORr COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEMS BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SO FT
m
OIL FURNACE NONE
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION: PHILADELPHIA PA
LATITUDE:-' 39. S8
TYPE OF BUILDING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING: 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.3 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CENT-3/GALL0N AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.


COLL SYS YRS TO YRS TO PAY NPV
AREA F PRICE + CASH RCOVR DP' BACK'- 20 YRS IRR
63. .69 3226. 11 15 15 S32\ 20.48
***********************************
THE ABOVE-REPORT" IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS*
NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 % DISCOUNT LOAN TERMSs 15 YEARS AT S.757. INTEREST WITH 77. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX .07.
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND- STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX-SAVINGS
£-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE)
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR
COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEMS- $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEATS AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE' FEET 3226 PLUS $ OTJ.
OIL FURNACE NONE
0 PER SQ FT
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION: PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDINGS--' SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDINGS 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
ELECTRICITY- PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CENTS/GALLON AT 15.07./YR
HOW MANY YEARS? 10;
ANNUAL BETWEEN A
DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
ADDITIONAL COSTS------------!------SAVINGS--------!----TOTAL---
!
LOAN REAL HAZARD YR PMT EST TX INSUR
i
MORTG TOTAL
INSUR MAINT COSTS UTIL
INCOME TOTAL NET CUM TAX SAVING SAVING SAVIN!


ANNUAL Uif-fCftati im. op jh i
BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
I 1 LOAN PMT ADDITION IAL COSTS 1. TOTAL COSTS SAVINGS- i TOTAL SAVING TOTAL
YR REAL EST-TX HAZARD INSUR MORTG INSUR MAINT UTIL INCOME TAX NET SAVING cur SAVII'
0 1 360. 199. 0. 0. 25. 584. 163 ~ 137. 301 . -226. -233. -50?
2 360. 213. 0. 0. 27. 690. 138. 1429. 1617. 1017. 50?
3 360. 228. 0. 0. 29. 617. 216. 140-.- 356. -260. 24;
4 360. 244. 0. 0. 31. 634. 243. 142. 390. -245. *2
5 360. 261. 0. 0. 33. 654. 285. 143. 429. -225. -222
6 360. - 279. 0. 0. 35. 674. 328. 145. 473. -201. -42'
7 360. 299. 0.- 0. 33. 696. 373. 146. 524- -172. -59*
3 360. 320. 0. 0. 40. 720. 434. 143. 582.- -133. -73-
9 360. 342. 0. 0. 43. 745. 499. 150.. 649. -96. -33£
10 360. ~ 366. 0. 0. 46. 772. 574. 151. 725. - -47.. -376
-5> -: 3593". 2752. 0. 0. 345. 6696. 3314. 2731.. 6045. -876.
$
***********************************
rV .
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE-FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX ,0V.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED) FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
5-::
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD
LOCATIONr
TYPE OF BUILDING:
SIZE OF BUILDING:
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS:
MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS PHILADELPHIA PA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 1500 SQUARE FEET 4
F-PRIME-R-UL .83
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE) .76
SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR--COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM:-BACKUP WATER HEATERr BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING' SYSTEM:
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET
$ 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER S3 FT
OIL
OIL FURNACE NONE
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CENTS/GALLON AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.

Zi COMMAND T>cb-68 l
l 69)PCT SOLAR VALUE EXEMPT FRM TAX r >1W
COMMAND*
.00 7.


ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW
BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE
ADDITIONAL COSTS------------!------SAVINGS-------!----TOTAL----
> i i
*
YR LOAN PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD INSUR MORTG INSUR MAINT TOTAL COSTS UTIL INCOME TAX TOTAL SAVING NET- SAVING CUM SAVIN!
0 1 360. 199. 0. 0. 25. 584. 163. 137. 301 - -226. -283. -509
2 360. 213. 0. 0. 27. 600. 188. 1429. 1617. 1017. 508
3 360. 223. 0. 0. 29. 617. 216. 140-.- 356.. -260. 247
4 360. 244. 0. 0. 31. 634. 243- 142. 390. -245. * 3
5 360. 261. 0. 0. 33. 654. 235. 143. 429-. -225. -222
6 360. Z79. 0. 0. 35. 674- 323. 14 5. 473. -201. -423
7 360. 299. 0. 0.- 38. 696. 373. 146. 524- -172. ' -596
3 360. 320. 0. 0. 40. 720. 434. 143- 582.- -138. - -734
9 360. 342. 0. 0. 43. 745. 499. 150- - 649. -- -96. -830
10 360. 366. 0. 0. 46. 772. 574. 151. 725. -47- -876
3593. *2752. 0. 0. 345. 6696. 3314. 2731. 6045. -876.
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE'FOLLOWING. ASSUMPTIONS:
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX .07.
MONTHLY LOAN-PAYMENT- INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST-ONLY
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND STATE COMBINED)'"FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATIONS' PHILADELPHIA PA 1
TYPE OF BUILDINGS SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDINGS-- - 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTSs 4
F-PRIME-R-UL -
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE)-SOLAR ENERGY USED FORr COLLECTOR AREAS
PRICE OF SOLARSYSTEMs- $
BACKUP WATER HEATERr BACKUP SPACE HEATS AIR CONDITIONIN& SYSTEMS
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ 0 PER SQ FT
OIL
OIL FURNACE NONE
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100-.0 CENTS/GALLON AT 15.07,/YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.
COMMAND:
>C h 68
' ao\or>T qoi ap Ufl! iip EXEMPT FRM TAX
.00 7.


*3fi
-Zk)PCT SOLAR VALUE EXEMPT FRM TAX *>100 COMMAND:
>r econ cash
.00 V.

COLL AREA F SYS PRICE YRS TO + CASH YRS TO RCOVR DP PAY BACK NPV 20 YRS IRR
63. .6? 3226. 7 2 11 2856. 90.64
********-************#*#************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:

NET PRESENT VALUE IS CALCULATED FOR 20 YEARS AT 10.0 7. DISCOUNT LOAN TERMSr 15 YEARS AT 8.75% INTEREST WITN 77. DOWN OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX' 100.07.
ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL-ANB STATE COMBINED)-'FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
V'
r? -
Ersr.: -
- %
,.;v. .
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA(NORMAL INCIDENCE) SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR*' COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $
oil
OIL FURNACE NONE
0 PER SQ FT
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS
LOCATION:
TYPE OF BUILDING: -
SIZE OF BUILDING:-NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS*
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENT3/KWH' AT 15.0%/YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CENTS/GALLQN^AT 15.0%/YR
PHILADELPHIA PA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 1500 SQUARE FEET 4
- -
-r j Tv/lr
"i".

HOW MANY YEARS? >10
ANNUAL DIFFERENTIAL CASH FLOW BETWEEN A SOLAR AND A NONSOLAR HOUSE I
I-------------ADDITIONAL COSTS--------------!-------SAVINGS--------!-----TOTAL----!
! I DAM PFAI Ua7An MHRTn TOTAL TNCP.MF THTAf MET _CUM


EE. I WCCI1 n vJULnn nnu f I
I1VMW
!-------------ADDITIONAL COSTS--------------!-------SAVINGS--------!----TOTAL-- !
! !
1 LOAN PMT REAL EST TX HAZARD INSUR MORTG INSUR MAINT TOTAL COSTS UTIL INCOME TAX TOTAL SAVING 'NET CUM SAVING SAVING
0 1 360. 0. 0. 0. 25. 385. 163. 78. 241. -226. -144.- -370.
2 360. 0. 0. 0. 27. 387. 188. 1365. 1553. 1166-. 796.
3 360. 0. 0. 0. 29. 388. 216. 72. 238. -101. 696.
4 360. 0. 0. 0. 31. 390. 248. 68. 317. -74. 622.
5 360. 0. 0. 0. 33. 393. 285. 65. 350. -42. 530.
6 360. 0. 0. 0. 35. 395. 328. 61. 389. -6. 574.
7 360. 0. 0. 0. 38. 397. 378. 57. 434. 37. 611.
8 360. 0. 0. 0. 40* 400. 434. 52. 436.- S6. 697.
9 360. 0. 0. 0. 43. 403. 499. 47. 546. 143. 841.
10 360. 0. 0. 0. 46. 406. 574. 41. 616. 210. 1050.
3598". 0. 0. 0. 345. 3944. 3314. 1906. 5220. 1050.
***********************************
THE ABOVE REPORT IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS-:
OVERALL PROPERTY TAX RATE 6.27.
SOLAR EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX 100.07.
MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT INCLUDES PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ONLY ASSUMES 307. TAX BRACKET (FEDERAL AND- STATE COMBINED)FOR CALCULATING TAX SAVINGS
THERMAL LOADS BASED ON HUD MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS LOCATION:- PHILADELPHIA PA
TYPE OF BUILDING: - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
SIZE OF BUILDING: 1500 SQUARE FEET
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 4
F-PRIME-R-UL
F-PRIME-R-TA (NORMAL- INCIDENCE)- SOLAR ENERGY USED FOR:
COLLECTOR AREA:
PRICE OF SOLAR SYSTEM: $
BACKUP WATER HEATER:
BACKUP SPACE HEAT:
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM:
.83
.76
HOT WATER ONLY 63 SQUARE FEET 3226 PLUS $ OIL
OIL FURNACE NONE
0
PER SQ FT
ELECTRICITY PRICE AND ESCALATION 6.8 CENTS/KWH AT 15.07./YR OIL PRICE AND ESCALATION RATE 100.0 CEMTS/GALLON AT 15.07./YR ENERGY CONSUMPTION COSTS INCLUDE HOT WATER AND SPACE HEATING ONLY. SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR.
COMMAND: >r ret
SUMMARY INFORMATION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM FOR AN EXISTING HOME
_____4 n.-vATrn T ki hiiti ar>r-* nur a na


E. Printout Analysis
The Printout provides the following information:
.... When DHW is not exempt from the property tax and only a conventional loan is available, cumulative savings do not occur for at least ten years
.... When DHW is not exempt from the property tax but a low interest loan of 8.75% is available, cumulative savings over an electric system begin in the second year
.... When DHW is 100$ exempt from the property tax and the low interest loan is available, cumulative savings begin as follows:
Electric second year Gas second year Oil second year
Thus, the importance of these two variables alone in the cost-effectiveness of a system is decisive. Although many states have already embraced the fact that the property tax exemption and low interest loans offer a long-term advantage to all parties involved, thr State of Pennsylvania has not as yet.
This is not to say, however, that the Pa. State Energy Plan presently being developed will not include these measures (although] the draft plan did not) or that DHW is infeasible without these incentives. It is merely that to the homeowner or landlord the concept of DHW is much more sensible if these measures do exist.
.. i:i.ral 1 ; it 3


V. Incentives
Federal Tax Credit is believed to be a highly significant incentive to solar use because it can be effectively administered through the federal tax structure for those systems meeting minimum acceptability criteria. An obvious barrier to the use of a tax credit on either the federal or state level is that it provides no incentive to low income households which pay little or no taxes. A tax rebate would help solve this problem.
The Energy Tax Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-618) provided for the first time income tax credits for renewable energy resource expenditures. For individual residences, a tax credit of 30$ of the first $2000 and 20$ of the next $8000 up to a maximum of $2000 was provided for installations on a taxpayer's principal residence.
Federal tax credits for alternative energy utilization are also included in the proposed windfall profits tax bill (H.R. 3919)* This bill would increase tax credits for qualified persons to 4-0$ of the first $10,000 invested. An additional 15$ up to $300 is also allowed for insulation and energy saving devices.
Solar Bank Another federal financing mechanism, the Bank should provide substantial impetus to the increased use of solar technologies. The purpose of the Bank is to make interest subsidies for home improvement loans and mortgages to both the residential and commercial sectors. Loans would be made directly to financial institutions at rates below the marke rate, to be passed along to the consumer.
Residential Conservation Service was implemented by DOE pursuant to the National Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1979* As stated in the final rules: "The purpose of the program is to encourage the installation of energy conservation measures, including


renewable resource measures, in existing homes by residential customers of larger gas and electric utilities as well as home heating supplierso" Essentially, the basis of the program is the utility sponsored audit, through which potential for energy conservation improvements and renewable energy installations will be identified. Also included in the RCS legislation is a mechanism by which a covered utility may finance the costs associated with financing and installing energy conservation and renewable resource measures.
State and Local Programs six states have enacted residential insured loan programs. Financing mechanisms vary, but the three primary types are through public utilities, bond issues or general revenues. Since 197^ (and as of this writing) 22 states have enacted income tax incentives. Also, nine states have enacted income tax deductions to cover all or part of the costs of a solar system. Property Tax Exemption Increased property taxes for solar installations represent a constant cost which could increase property taxes each year, potentially adding 30 to ^0 percent to the cost of the system (notet this is verified by the RSVP). In so doing, payback periods are increased. The provision of a tax exemption is an ideal first step, on the state level, for reducing barriers to solar implementation. It is the most commonly used legislative incentive. Property tax exemptions provide high visibility and have no effect upon the state treasury since any loss of income will affect the municipal or local levels. A study conducted by Utah State University in 1977, entitled "Impact of Tax Incentives and Auxiliary Fuel Prices on the Utilization Rate of Solar Energy Space Conditioning" concluded that property tax exemptions could increase solar applications by 3Q.6fl> by the year 2000 in smaller owner occupied homes.


VI. Implementation Strategy
The Implementation Strategy is a basic shopping list of ideas which must be refined when implementation money becomes available.
One approach to implementation consistent with this report is to administer activities based on existing heating types. For instance, oil or gas heated and poorly insulated homes would become eligible for federally sponsored insulation and conservation loans and grants; homes that are gas heated and moderate-well insulated would be eligible for insulation, conservation, and DHW loans or grants; and, electric heated homes that are poorly insulated would be eligible for insulation, conservation, and DHW loans (grants excluded because of the near immediate payback period and because electric users are usually of a higher income).
In accordance with this approach, target areas wpuld be identified. For example, Greenwich is the likely setting for loans and grants for insulation and conservation in gas and oil heated homes and apartments; Pennsport and Whitman could benefit from the same program, as most of these homes are inadequately insulated and using gas; Little Italy, which houses most of the electric units in the study area, would be provided with loans for insulation, conservation, and solar. Since major fund providers frequently demand high visibility as one condition on their investment, likely locations in the study area for these improvements are along the major corridors of Broad, Front, Snyder, Passyunk, Moyamensing, etc.
There are also many measures which can be taken which require no outside funding assistance at all. A homeowner's purchasing cooperative could be formed to acquire weatherization, insulation and DHW materials at wholesale prices, perhaps through an arrangement



with a neighborhood hardware store or building supply. Resident homeowners could be included, as well as non-resident landlords. 7^ economies of group buying would help to lower costs, and local might be prevailed upon to provide neighborhood-wide home improves**^ loan packages. It would be pointed out to the bankers that lower energy costs improve homeowner's ability to meet monthly mortgage installments.
To encourage landlords in the neighborhood to install insulatl** and weatherization devices and to improve the efficiency of conr*s** t ional heating systems, an educational campaign could be launched. demonstrate savings that they would realize on fuel bills. The ***& saved on the annual fuel bill may well be greater than the tv-aw- vug on a loan taken to finance the building's energy improvements.
Such a campaign should also be started to reach homeowners are presently using electric heat to alert them to the savings would realize with DHW. These activities should be launched by Institute for Community Issues.
Funding Sources Because this particular strategy is to residential activity, funding at the federal level focuses e*
There are two major HUD programs now in existence which inclai* energy saving measures as eligible activities: The Community elopment Block Grant, and the Neighborhood Self-Help Develop***** Program. Also from HUD (new this year) is the Innovative Graft* Program, which permits municipalities to submit applications 1 funding of large scale concentrated alternative energy acti**u The fate of Philadelphia's proposal is as yet undecided.


The Residential Conservation Services Program, coupled with these existing HUD programs, is expected to double annually the number of DHW systems in use in the U.S.
Because the Institute for Community Issues has an excellent track record with CETA, it is likely that CETA funds would be available to provide manpower training in both insulation and DHW application procedures. This training period could take place almost immediately and concurrent to other education and fund raising activities by the Institute.
Of course, other funding sources do exist, most notably the large foundations from which the Institute has received grants in the past. At any rate, it is clear that levels of funding are beginning to reflect the levels of interest regarding energy conservation in the Philadelphia region and, with the adoption of a sound energy policy of its own, the Institute may be confident in its capacity to attract funds to introduce solar energy to its service area.


APPENDIX A
NEIGHBORHOOD ENERGY ANALYSIS
The Philadelphia Solar Planning Project's energy analysis technique proceeds by organizing available data onto three consecutively completed worksheets.
1. The first form completed is the Building Type Allocation Worksheet.
a. Census bureau printouts for the study area supply the basic demographic data.
b. The count of residential structures by type is entered from a tabulation of buildings in each tax category in the city tax files.
c. The number of owner and renter-occupied structures by building type is developed from this data. All figures for building types
were established according to these percentages, except for types U50 and U30, which, as apartments, are presumed to be all renter-occupied.
id. The number of endrow and midrow buildings is determined by aerial photographs and use of the Sanborn maps. End and midrow numbers for each housing type are assigned according to this proportion.
e. The age of the structure is presented, based on census data and knowledge of the area.
f. The number of poor, moderately, and well insulated units is entered. This is an estimate, based on certain assumptions.
The homes were built at the period of cheap energy, and most housing stock of that era was not well insulated to begin with. The age of the houses reduces energy efficiency even more. Renter occupancy also suggests lower insulation as landlords have little incentive to insulate.
It may be assumed that some of the owner occupied structures have been moderately or well.'.insulated.


Building Type
Mid
Total Age
Occupant Own/Rent
030 Row/ 0
2 story brick R
P. 3 0 P.ow/Bmt Gar 0
2 Story Brick R
1! 3 2 Row/Bmt Gar 0
2 story br-stone R
U 3 0 Row/Apts 0
(C ) 2 Story Brick R
S 3 0 Row/0£fice-Sto 0
(C) 2 Story Brick R
050 Row 0
3 Story Brick R
S 5 0 Row/Of f ice-Sto 0
(C) 3 Story Brick R
U 5 0 Row/Apts 0
(C) 3 1/2 Story Bk R
K 1 2 Semi-det/Bmt Gar 0
1 Story Brick R
H 3 0 Semi-det/Bmt G 0
2 Story Bk R
K 3 0 Semi-det/Bmt G 0
2 Story B k- R
K32 Semi-det/Bmt G 0
2 Story Bk/Stone R
J 3 0 Semi-det/Bmt G 0
2 Story Bk R
H 5 0 Semi-de t 0
3 Story Brick R
End
Other
0
R
Table A.1 Building Data Allocation
Neighborhood_________________ Census Tract#__________
Population___________ Population Density_____________
Household Income, Average_________ % Vacancy_________
Insulation Flat Rf. S Wall Space Heat DHW Poor/Med/Well gas/el/oil gas/el/oil


It is therefore estimated that 5$ of the homes that axe owner-occupied are well insulated, moderately insulated, and 80fo
poorly insulated. Of the rental units, it is assumed that 10% are moderately insulated and 90% are poorly insulated. Field audits to spot check this assumption or comparison of calculated energy use to actual usage in typical houses might further confirm or deny those assumptions.
g. The number of flat and sloped roofs are entered. This is estimated from a knowledge of the neighborhood housing types and a review
from aerial photos.
h. The number of residential buildings with walls facing north of northeast and south or southwest is entered. These numbers come from a computation of city tax files.
i. The number of units using gas, electric, and oil is entered. 2
2. The second form completed in the analysis is the Neighborhood Energy Use Evaluation Worksheet. See Table A2.
a. The total number of units in each housing category is entered fronthe BUILDING TYPE ALLOCATION WORKSHEET.
b. The characteristic heat loss for each building type is entered from Table A3* This Table was compiled by applying ASHRAE heat loss calculations to typical Philadelphia examples of each housing type.
c. The heat loss per building is calculated by multiplying the characteristic heat loss from Table A3 by ^-866, which is the typical number of degree days for Philadelphia, and then by the typical square footage of a Philadelphia house of that type. See Table A**.
d. The total heat loss per building type is calculated and entered. This is the heat loss per building multiplied by the number of buildings.


e. The number of homes using each type of fuel is calculated, by adding the numbers on the Building Type Allocation Worksheet*
f. The amount of each type of fuel used per each type of building is calculated and entered. It is assumed from this study that the residential heat loss equals the heating load of the space heating system. It thereby ignores heating caused by appliances and body heat. The heat loss per building is divided by the characteristic number of btu's available for each unit of fuel. The btu's available differs from the number of btu's per unit of fuel according to the operating efficiency of the heating system. For example, although
a cubic foot of natural gas can produce from 1000 to 1050 btu's, if we assume an overall heating plant efficiency of 78^, the actual heat obtainable from a cubic foot of gas is 780 btu's. Here are the actual heat obtainable figures that were used.
Theoretical Actual Heat Obtainable
No. 2 Oil 137,000 to 141,800 97,300 btu's/gallon
btu's/gallon .
Natural Gas 1000 10^0 btu's/cubic ft. 780 btus/cubic ft.
Electricity 3413 btu's/ KWH 3413 btu'sAWH
./ .}' V- ; v '/A/ r-
; ; ; .r / .
These values are taken from page 642 of the Passive Solar Energy Book, Expanded Professional Edition by Ed Mazria.
g. The total fuel used per building type is calculated. This is the fuel used per building multiplied by the total number of buildings using the fuel.
3. The third form completed in the analysis process is the Possible Neighborhood Energy Savings Worksheet. See Table A5.


Table A.2 Energy Use Worksheet
Neighborhood:
Building Type:
Midrow Endrow
Owner Renter Owner - Renter
Total
Typical SF
Heat Loss Btu/SF/Degree Day
Heat Loss/Building Btu's
Heat Loss/
Building Type TOTAL Btu's
No. Using Gas
Gas Used CF/Bldg/yr
Gas Used TOTAL CF/yr
No. Using Oil
Oil Used gal/Bldg/yr
Oil Used TOTAL gal/yr
No. Using Electric
Electricity Used KwH/Bldg/yr
Electricity Used TOTAL KwH


TABLE A 2
MIDROW ENDROW
OWNER RENTER OWNER RENTER
TOTAL 1
NSULATION LEVEL poor med. Well POOR MED. WELL POOR MED. WELL POOR MED. WEI
TOTAL/LEVEL
TU/SQ. FT./D. DAY
EAT LOSS/BUILDING
DTAL LOSS: FOR LIILDING TYPE
uoING GAS - - *
\S USED/BUILDING
DTAL GAS USED
USING OIL
CL USED/BUILDING
DTAL OIL USED

USING ELECTRIC
LEC. USED/BUILDING
TOTAL ELEC. USED * V ;* *_. _y~ %


r H --> HiPVU^y^ '\u[v& #t?r!q r \ i Wi^ Irrjui^cifov
i f~" 2 5for^ four- f4iA-£ta4>. 15.50 l Tsrg-ga ~ Ti [ i 10.46 Mk?
3 four HuA- 15.DD la 7 2 a 23
2 5>W^ fou; &\A 'd.ooV. Ho Wi^ow^ 22.43 15.24 7.
3 fow- !2*\A Hfotk \\D \jJi/rJ.!rWir 13.43 .>4.10 &.&£>
3 fow 5V\4 thcck Ho IiX'aAjw^ tf.53 15.2] ?.I4
2 5Wi| fow £W. blotfo /|wian. lorffo UWW'i' 25.25 13.3 0 4.15
3 5Wuj fow- &.xK 'tkck. or 'x^J\n\ turlk LwUuW- 21.33 \e.ef[ 6.45
6 3W<^ ^cfouvfow^. jA?w>c^ 24. 5 13.3 1.7
2 sT^v l >N 11 $r^) !.- ^/)(]oV JHf i -+ 3 c4'
7- fc-.n t -.......-----------------------............. ......
^ b/^vu i ^ j ^ l l-\ L\ \ 7 ^ )
r)


PHILADELPHIA SOLAR PLANNING PROJECT
f/j hU
Averages of Audit Results for Heat Loss and Square Footage by Housing Type
TYPE
030
Row/Two-Story/Brick
R30
Row with Basement Garage/Two-Story/Brick
050
Row/Three-Story/Brick
K30
Semi-detached w/Basement Carage/Two-Story/Brick
SQUARE FOOTAGE AUDIT SANBORN
BTU/SF/DD
AUDIT AUDIT & AUDIT & UTILITY &
ONLY UTILITY SANBORN SANBORN


j /l/^Libor WJi f-8?
J $u)L Propped £>1PYCI\I ) ^<7/n|k
r ?/ T
A.J
i Ou/v)-^ / C?Uvy)^/,
tAaL i
,^eJ
rr (ier \HTtif \L/i~f\

i* *ftj *> Y'J&'J
y V"

J /J * --

- U^i d j
J ' ^7+L uj ;/ 7 k

1 f -
^0 D5iy)^_ [>]L
*i L ^ / Ut^--

* /A ui i C > i/,
l,U
lP&L s L UH n
i
7, |I rr> sLi\gicj\j mqA.. Li -- i .... ........
1 t 1 .....
1 -


a. The total number of buildings per building type is entered from the Building Type Allocation Worksheet,
b. The energy saving for each proposed improvement is calculated
and entered, Th'isdata was compiled by the Philadelphia Solar Planning Project and is contained in Table A6.
The figures for most of the improvements listed is presented in btu's/degree day, and thus must be multiplied by ^866, the typical number of degree days in a Philadelphia heating sewson.
The figures for tuning (improving the efficiency of) a heating
'}
system in a moderately insulated home were used, beeause home insulation is another improvement suggested. The figures for adding insulation to uninsulated buildings are used because uninsulated homes may get first priority in a neighborhood-wide insulation program.
The figure for a domestic hot water system is based on a standard size system, and is given in Table A6 in million btu's per year.
c. The total energy savings per unit is calculated and entered.
This is the total btu's saved for all improvements taken together.
d. The number of housing types using each fuel is entered from the Neighborhood Energy Use Evaluation Worksheet.
e. The amount of fuel saved per building type is calculated and entered This is computed by dividing the total energy saved per building
type that uses a given fuel by the net obtainable btu value of that fuel. This resulting figure is then multiplied by the number of houses that use that fuel.
housing
f. -The total neighborhood energy savings for each >Vbtype is calculated by multiplying the annual energy savings per unit by the total number of buildings of that type.


ENERGY SAVINGS RESULTING FROM EACH RETROFIT APPLICATION [ TO A SINGLE DWELLING UNIT
(in BTUs Retrofit Application and ^ Level of Existing Insulation per Degree Day, unless otherwise noted) Type of Row House Mid Block Mid Block End of Row 2 Story3 3 Storyb 2 Story3 End of Row 3 Storyb
2 Coabustion Efficiency Flame retention burners:
poorly insulated 1,988 2,897 3,213 4,107
moderately insulated 1,341 2,062 2,347 3,057
well insulated 821 1,170 1,276 1,631
Tuning:
poorly Insulated 442 644 714 913
moderately insulated 298 458 522 679
well Insulated 182 260 284 363
Controls
Clock thermos tat:J poorly insulated 884 1,288 1,428 1,825
moderately insulated 596 917 1,043 1,359
well insulated 365 520 567 725
Water saving showerhead (million BTU per year) 5.170 5.170 5.170 5.170
Storm Windows and Doors 2,869 4,859 4,445 7,046
Attic Insulation no attic insulation existing 2,143 2,987 2,143 2,987
3" of insulation existing 226 314 226 314
11 Insulation _W- 2,246 3,370 5,391 8,043
Moveable Insulation
Ho existing storm sash 1,564 2,539 2,561 3,762
All windows with storm sash 1,109 1,832 1,816 2,668
t>olar Space
poorly insulated 1,411 1,498 1,587 1,685
noderately insulated 1,160 1,464 1,3U5 1,647
well insulated 1,029 1,308 1,158 1,472
Solar Wall
poorly insulated 2,583 4,311 2,915 4,864
moderately Insulated 2,362 3,942 2,608 4,352
well insulated 2,050 3,422 1,998 3,334
4 Active DHW (million BTU per year) ' 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.000
Active Heating & DHW^ (million BTU per year) 54.390 54.390 54.390 54.390


g. Total possible neighborhood energy savings in btu's for all types of housing can be calculated by adding the total energy savings for each type.


:'-V ? > V-\' .:n
M *
: -

~ l *
_
4 . .
!

. ; .
v .
V






(A10)




r.'... VS f > jfa!#jgp
''I:

ipipp?
W>*£ '. y-Mwx
J ,.; f ;*VV:;:> ,* .i~( ft/'
20f wnwi
POLAR M SLATING
W' COCK *<)
"*? r*
** C*tVU*' IN L.tMtfR
OPERATED BY THE FRANKLIN INSTITUTE RESEARCH LABORATORIES UNDER A rlitihjfcu CONTRACT VMTH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING A URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN
COOPERATION WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY.


\
:k%.
RSVP: INTRODUCTION
" ;*
iftib

Solar apaco and domestic hot watot hasting. It s hero and It works. But, will it sell? Will it save? And will the savings justify the initial Investment?
*
These are key economic questions which face the lender, the builder, and the homebuyer when they consider the residential use of solar energy.
Answering these questions is not a simple matter. Smart dollar and cents decisions must integrate a wide variety of factors for Individual situations:
How much heating and/or hot water is used in the home?
How much sunshine is available?
What size and type of system is appropriate to the heating needs and the location of the home?
What will it cost to install the system?
What are the estimated energy savings?
These and many other variables will influence the final evaluation of the feasibility of a solar energy system. , .
To allow quick, easy estimation of the economic implications of these variables, Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc., under a contract with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), has developed a simplified computer program called RSVPResidential Solar Viability Program.
RSVP is a practical tool for lenders and the people they deal withbuilders, architects, realtors, and homebuyers. It is fast, inexpensive to use and asks questions and provides responses In conversational English. Because of its format, RSVP requires little prior knowledge of computer programming or use.
According to their interests, users can choose from a number of different reports, at least one of which addresses their particular needs. For instance, financial institutions can benefit from RSVP's Lender s Report, which presents widely accepted measures of mortgage feasibility for properties with and without a solar energy system. RSVP also has a built in flexibility which allows users to develop customized reports tailored to their specific requirements.
RSVP offers reports for solar hot water and/or sparse heating systems for both new and existing single family homes or multi-family dwellings. Descriptions of several of the available reports, along with a sample case for each, are presented later.
t


RSVP: HOW IT WORKS i
' V'v V: ' . .!;'
RSVP begins by asking the user some basic questions about the solar energy system, the physical characteristics of the house, the arrangements for financing, and the prevailing utility rains. {See Table One: RSVP Work Sheet.) Once this Information has been entered, RSVP estimates the buildings hoating and domestic hot water needs and the portion of those needs which could be met by a proposed solar energy system.
Using these estimates, monthly cash flows are computed for the building both with and without a solar system. This kind of comparison gives the user a clear picture of the solar system s relative meiit over time.
For more accurate estimates. RSVP allows the user to suppty many specific engineering and economic details. (See Table Two: RSVP Variables.) With the addition of each separate input, the analysis changes selectively. The more variables provided by the user, the more specific the analysis can become. *
When such details aro not entered, RSVP automatically usfes a "best' estimate or default value, which it can supply to the user upon request. Best" estimates provide the RSVP user with reasonable approximations of actual quantities.
The program is designed to be used in association with a User's Manual which contains more detailed explanations of the various inputs.
RSVP can also*assist the user in analyzing a proposed system by illustrating the impact of key factors, such as fuol costs and collector size, on solar economics. Among the items that can be varied are:
hot water usage
solar energy system cost
building heat load
fuel escalation rates
amount of down payment
Because it includes such a large number of variables, the Residential Solar Viability Program offers a more complete and reliable hasis for decision-making than do general rules-of-thumb.
A'Vii


'' /.y 1 A-iyl'y £ i '.yjijjjf i£jj£
TABLE ONE: RSVP WORK
c
Tills lorm Is an illustrative work sheet showing the baslo Information necessary to operate RflVP for a single family dwelling. "Beat" estimated or dofAult values may be used to complete an RSVF analysts.
........... "-- nw .......------------
/^Project Description
Solsr Application:
Hot Water Only 8pace Heating Only
Both
Location (City, 8tabe)
Number of Occupants eq. it. Floor Axea of Heated Spaoe
Color System Description (if known)
____ Collector Type
Collector Tilt Angle
Collector Orientation (dogroes from 8outh)
Backup System
Domestic Hot Water Heater Type:
Space Heating System Type:
IMIW

Project Type:
New Single Family ... Existing 8lngle Pamlly
Sfi.
Square Feet Collector Area
\ v T- iy' \ ''k '*; 'J }>

Fuel Co3ls:
Estimated Yearly Price Escalation:
Electric, Electric Baseboard Natural Oas Furnace Oil Furnace g/Kwh,
Gaa,
\
Oil
Electric Furnaco Heat Pump (air-to-air)
g/ therm.,
g/gol.
|U
Coats < ______
$/sq. ft.
Purchase Price of Home Without the 8olar Equipment
Installed Coat of 8olar System in Dollars per sq. ft. of Collector Area
Taut Information .
______% Property Tax Rate '
_______% Solar System Property Tax Exemption (If applicable)
- __ % Owner Income Tax Rate (combined Federal and State)
Finance Information
% Mortgage Loan to Value Ratio or Down Payment on Home Improvement Loan (If any)
___% Interest Rate on Mortgage or Home Improvement Loan
yrs. Term of Mortgage or Home Improvement Loan


4
TABLE TWO: RSVP
This table lists all of tho variables which can he used in an RSVP Analysis. RSVP contains best" estimates or default values for many of these items; users have the option of accepting the R8VP best" estimates or entering their own values.
Ur Provided Variables AS VP Provided Variables
ln(imrln|
Inputs
ClVy Code Number Collector Area
Building Thormal Factor Constant Dally Heat Generation Bol&r System Type
TrU l* rR(ra)
Number of Collector Covers Collector Tilt Angle Collector Azimuth Anglo 8torage Capacity Solar Fraction (F)
Consumption factors:
Number of Occupants Building Type Building Size
Consumption Factors:
Annual Conventional Fuel Usage
Annual Space Heating Load Hot Water Usage Hot Water Temperature Water Supply Temperature
System and Conventional** Water Heater and
Fuel Price Heating System Type
Inputs Backup Water Hoater and
Heating 8ystom Type Present Conventional Fuel Price Conventional Fuel Escalation Rato
Escalation Rate Type (Compound, Simple Linear % Increase, User Input Series)
Utility Expenses Above Hot Water and Space Heating
Purchase Price/
Appraised
Values
Purchase Price Factors:
Non-Solar Homo Purchase Price
Bolar System Fixed Cost
Solar System Area Dependent Cost
Purchase Price Factors:
8olar Home Purchase Price Solar Cost Per Energy Used
I>on Factors:
Loan Appraisal Value Conventional Home 8olar Homs Solar System
Solar System Value Price Ratio Market Value Appreciation Rato




i&r*
User Frovdflad Variable*
wrw Provided Variables
Overhead
Fxpenao
Inputs
Tax Inputs
Financing
Inputs
Loan to Value Ratio Interest Rate
I
'Two Collector Efficiency Parameters Obtained Prom Collector Test Data "Used for Comparison Between Solar and Non-Solar Homes as well as for Backup Systems
Mortgage Type Mortgage Term Mortgage Graduation Rate Number of Years of Mortgage Payment Increase Mortgage Insurance Premium Mortgage Insurance Life Closing Costs % Downpayment Points Payment
Discount Rate
Period of Financial Analysis Opportunity Coat of Down Payment
8olar 8ubslc\yFixed
8olar SubsidyPercent of Price
Property Tax Rate % Solar Value Exempt from Tax Combined Federal/State Income Tax
y - " .*, A \ ' t
Solar Home Maintenance and Repairs
Non-8olar Home Maintenance and Repairs Solar Home Insurance Costs Non-Solar Home Insurance Costs
l *
Annual Property Tax Tax Assessment Rate
Miscellaneous
Inputs



, * . *£*; ,t n-{^m : u
, / 'fi ; v*; ; j$#-*'*ffr- i.. r

REPORT FOUR:
ENGrNEEREKTG DATA SUMMARY =
V ,*
The Engineering Data Summary reports the annual energy coosumptfort (MfcSQtu) for n residence with and without a cotar system. The analysis is based on month-by-month incident solar radiation and hot water and space heating toads.
. V .x X; ..?..-/ 1 ? V '
8T. LOUIS, MISSOURI LATITUDE: 3Q.4B ^
Total Hot Opaea
Incident Water Heat atoiAT
Radiation Load Load Fraction
(MMBTU) (MMBTU) (MMBTU) oo
JAN 9.843 1 823 13.204 26
FED 10.831 1.370 10.670 37
MAR 14.314 1.323 8617 57
APR 14.491 1.474 \ 3.436 90
MAY 16347 1.523 1.301 100
JUN 16.176 1.474 .120 100
JUL 17 002 1.523 .000 lOO
AUG 10 579 1.523 .000 lOO
SEP 18.763 1.474 .443 100
OCT 14.083 1 523 2 830 94
NOV 11.216 1.474 7.882 48
DEC 9.060 1.523 11.903 28
TOTAL 106 246 17 929 00018 81
ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION WITHOUT SOLAR ( MMBTU ) ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION WITH SOIAR (MMBTU)*
Bloctricitjr Goa Oil
77.947 .000 .000
38 374 .000 OOO
For hot water and space heating only Accounts for system efficiency factor.


12
REPORT FIVE:
EXISTING HOME SUMMARY CO__________________________
t
This sample Existing Homo Summary Comparison shows the economic implications of adding a solar domestic hot wotor system to a (hypothetical) homo in Ft. Smith, Arkansas. Below are somo of the koy assumptions used in this report:
&, :;,v i' ... , .<..
AVERAOE 80LAR COLLECTOR PERFORMANCE VALUES HOT WATER USAGE (4 OCCUPANTS): 70 Clallons/Day
BACKUP WATER HEATING: Electric
BACKUP ENERGY PRICE: 4 Cents/Kwh.
ELECTRICITY ESCALATION RATE: 7%/Year
COLLECTOR AREA: 60 Square Feet
LOCATION:
SYSTEM PRICE:
DOWN PAYMENT:
LOAN AMOUNT ( 12 Years/12%) MONTHLY LOAN PAYMENT: UTILITY SAVING3 18T YEAR: PERCE NTSOLAR CONTRIBUTION:
MONTHLY COSTS
Ft. Smith, Arkansas $2,000 None $2,000 $26 $111 63%
Year 1
Year 6
Year IS
ttiar eaUr iiir fsi (tltr Ssltr lit-nlu
UTILITY COSTS* 78 87 109 122 163 183
UTILITY COSTS AID LOAN PAYMENTS* * 104 87 135 122 189 183
SAVINGS FROM TAX DEDUCTIONS* * 6 0 4 0 0 0
TOTAL COSTS AFTER TAX SAVINGS 08 87 131 122 188 183
Includes Hot Water Heating, Space Heating, Cooling, and Appliances and Maintenance Expenses (125/Year)
Includes Carrying Charges: Principal and Interest Only; Does not Include Property Taxes or Insurance
Assumes a 30% Tax Bracket foe Federal and State Income Tax



Reprinted with permission of CHANGING TIMES Magazine. (c) 1980, Kiplinger Washington Editors. Inc September 1980.
Energy tax breaks, state by state
Tax breaks for installing alternative-energy systems
] Tax breaks for installing alternative-energy systems and for conservation and weatherization projects | | No tax breaks
N£8I
see
below
Tax breaks for installing alternative-energy systems are in roman type
Tax Dreaks lor conservation and weatherization projects are in italics
ALABAMA
Income tax deduction 100% ol cost of wood stove installed in existing home as primary
neat source
ALASKA
Tne state income tax has been rescinded i''definitely and residents who have lived in Alas'-3 for at least three years will receive a full re'uod of income taxes paid in 1979 All residents "S and cider will receive an energy dividend rom a permanent fund created from the state's oil arc r-me'al royalties This year qualifying res.derts will receive S50 tor each year they have iived in Alaska since statehood in 1959 (maximum erec t S1 050)
ARIZONA
Income tax credit: 35% of cost of solar energy devices to maximum credit of $1,000 Solar system is exempt from state sales and property tax
Income lax credit 25% ot cost ol items that qualify for federal credit to maximum credit of S100
ARKANSAS
Income tax deduction 100% of cost of solar and other alternative-energy equipment, including passive solar systems and airtight wood-burning stoves
Income tax deduction 100% ot cost of energysaving items that qualify for federal credit plus whole-house fans, glass fireplace doors and more efficient light bulbs and fixtures
CALIFORNIA
Income tax credit: 55% of cost of installing solar energy system to maximum credit of $3,000
Credit is reduced by amount of federal credit
COLORADO
Income tax credit: 30% of cost of solar geothermal and wind energy systems to maximum credit of S3.000. Systems are exempt from property tax until 1990
Income tax credit 20% of cost of items that qualify for federal credit to maximum credit ol $J00
CONNECTICUT
No state income tax Wind, water and solar devices are exempt from sales tax Local option to exempt alternative systems from property tax for 15 years
DELAWARE
Income tax credit $200 for homeowners who install solar hot-water systems
FLORIDA
No state income tax Solar equipment is exempt from property tax
642 Journal Of Housing


GEORGIA
Residents may apply ior refund ot sales tax paid on solar equipment toe a I option to exempt solar systems trom property taxes
HAWAII
Income tax credit 10% ol cost of solar waterheating system Alternative-energy systems are exempt from property tax
Income lax credit $30 maximum lor insulation ot wate' heaters and pipes
IDAHO
Income tax deduction: 100% of cost of solar, geothermal, wind and wood energy systems (40% of cost is deducted in first year 20% each year for next three years up to $5,000 each year)
Income tax deduction 100% ol cost ol insulation Storm doors, storm windows, caulking and weather stripping, same maximum and deduction schedule as alternative sources
ILLINOIS
Active solar system will not add to property tax assessment
INDIANA
Income tax credit 25% ol cost of solar and wind systems to maximum credit of $3,000 Active systems are exempt from property tax
Incr/me tax deduction 100% ol cost ol insulation, storm windows, storm doors double-pane windows and weather stripping to maximum deduction of St 000
IOWA
Active solar systems are exempt from property tax
KANSAS
Income tax credit 30% of cost of solar and wind systems to maximum credit of $1,500 Systems are exempt from property tax until 1985 Residents whose solar systems provide at least 70% of their heating or cooling needs may receive refund of 35% of property taxes (to qualify for property tax refund, system must be installed by end of 1980)
Inr.r.me tax deduction 50% ot cost ol insulation lor homes built before July I 1977. to maximum deduction ol $500
MAINE
Income tax credits: 20% of cost of solar, wind and wood central-heating systems to maximum credit of $100. Solar systems are exempt from property tax. Sales tax on solar eauipment will be refunded.
MARYLAND
Active solar and wind systems will not increase property tax assessment; counties may offer property tax credit
MASSACHUSETTS
Income tax credit: 35% of cost of residential so:a' and other renewable-energy systems that qualify for federal credit to maximum credit of $1 000 State credit is based on cost of system minus federal tax credit Systems win cot add to property tax assessments for 20 years Wood stoves that cost more than $900 are r' v sales tax
MICHIGAN
Income tax credit for 1980 25% ot fast $2 000 and 15% of next $8 000 spent for sour a-r
other renewable-energy systems Systems are exempt from sales and property taxes
MINNESOTA
Income tax credit 20% of cost of systems that qualify for federal credit passive solar systems and eadh-sheltered homes to maximum credit of 52.000 Systems exempt from property tax.
MONTANA
Income tax credit 15% of first $1 000 and 2.5% of next S3 000 spent for non-fossil-fuel energy systems including solar, wind and water Ten-year exemption from real estate tax on up to S20 000 m capital investment for alternative-energy system
Income tax deduction sliding scale ranging trom 10% to 100% ol cost ol conservation improvements, including insulation and storm windows, maximum deduction ot $1.800
NEBRASKA
Sales tax refund tor alternative-energy devices
NEVADA
No state income tax Special property tax allowance for alternative-energy systems
NEW HAMPSHIRE
No stale income or sales tax Local option to grant property tax exemption for solar systems.
NEW JERSEY
Solar and wind systems are exempt from state sales and property taxes
NEW MEXICO
Income tax credit: 25% of cost of solar systems to maximum credit of $1 000
NEW YORK
Solar and wind systems are exempt from properly tax for 15 years
NORTH CAROLINA
Income tax credit 25% of cost of solar systems to maximum credit of $1,000 Solar systems will not increase property tax assessment.
NORTH DAKOTA
Income tax credit: 5% per year for two years for cost of solar and wind systems Solar systems are exempt from property tax for five years
OHIO
Income tax credit 10% of cost of solar, wind and geothermal systems to maximum credit of $1 000 Systems are exempt from state sales and real property taxes
Income tax credit 10% ol cost ol items that duality lor federal credit
OKLAHOMA
Declining income tax credit: for 1980. 32% of cost of solar and wind systems to maximum credit of S3 200 Credit will be 28% in 1981 and 24% m 1982
OREGON
income tax credit 25% of cost of residential solar.
wma geothem- Income tax credit 2:-% js: /a*
materials installed >r p, r' pa' >- maximum credit o* S 25
RHODE ISLAND
Income tax credit 10% of cost o* s.- a- anc: renewable-energy, systems to :
of Si.000 Systems wnt not me'ease p':oe-v -a. assessment Sales tax cad on ecu will be refunded
Income tax cred't'or a"d c'ds 20% s' weather/zation mprovemt>n*s ej pr p- *. maximum erect of SoOC oe bu j "g a-d ;a credit ol S5 0CC
SOUTH CAROLINA
Income tax deduction 25% of cost o V"ewao e-energy installations a*te' July t "980 deduction is S 000
Income tax deduction 25% of cost of conservation expenditures mace aft?'.. I960 Maximum dea'uction is S 000
SOUTH DAKOTA
No state income tax Property tax exeptv based on value of renewable-energy system.
TENNESSEE
No state income tax Property tax exemption *0' solar and wind systems
TEXAS
No stale income tax Solar wma ana wa'?' syslems are exempt from sales tax Vaue solar and wind systems is exempt trom pc ; .-nt tax
UTAH
Income tax credit 10% of cost ot solar .v~ g and small hydro svstems to maximum --r: $1 000
VERMONT
Income tax credit 25% of cost cf sea' .vm and hydro systems and wood central "eatmg maximum credit ot St 000 Local optic" 'c er-'-c systems from property tax
VIRGINIA
Local option to exempt alternative-energy systems from p-operty tax
WASHINGTON
No slate income tax Alternative-energy systems are exempt from property tax
WISCONSIN
No tax credit Direct refunds to eligioie res.qen's who install solar wind waste conversion or small alcohol-tuel production systems Re'uno to* installations on homes built before 4o' 20 -
1977. is 24% ot cost of system to maximum payment of $2,400 Refund for installation on homes built since April 20. 1977 is 16% of cost to maximum of $1,600 Beginning next year active solar and wind systems are exempt from property tax until 1995
NOTE: An income tax deduction is subtracted from taxable income before you apply the state s tax rate An income tax credit is subtracted directly from the amount ol taxes owed The federal e-erg, credits referred to are discussed in the accompanying article Because ot space limitations and me mtricacy of state tax taws, it is impossible to provide all the details about the lifted tax breaks Some are subject to change. Check with your state energy office for more information
December 1980 643


APPENDIX A
NEIGHBORHOOD ENERGY ANALYSIS
The Philadelphia Solar Planning Project's energy analysis technique proceeds by organizing available data onto three consecutively completed worksheets.
1. The first form completed is the Building Type Allocation Worksheet.
a. Census bureau printouts for the study area supply the basic demographic data.
b. The count of residential structures by type is entered from a tabulation of buildings in each tax category in the city tax files.
c. The number of owner and renter-occupied structures by building type is developed from this data. All figures for building types
were established according to these percentages, except for types U50 and U30, which, as apartments, are presumed to be all renter-occupied.
d. The number of endrow and midrow buildings is determined by aerial photographs and use of the Sanborn maps. End and raidrow numbers for each housing type are assigned according to this proportion.
e. The age of the structure is presented, based on census data and knowledge of the area.
f. The number of poor, moderately, and well insulated units is entered. This is an estimate, based on certain assumptions.
The homes were built at the period of cheap energy, and most housing stock of that era was not well insulated to begin with. The age of the houses reduces energy efficiency even more. Renter occupancy also suggests lower insulation as landlords have little incentive to insulate.
It may be assumed that some of the owner occupied structures have been moderately or wellinsulated.


)
%
Building Type Occupant End Mid
Own/ Rent
030 Row/ 0 ______ ____
2 story brick R ___________ ____
R30 P.ow/Bmt Gar 0 ______ ____
2 Story Brick R ___________ ____
U 3 2 Row/Bmt Gar 0 _________
2 story br-stone R ________ ____
U 3 0 Row/Apts 0
(C) 2 Story Brick R ___________ _____
S30 Row / 0 £ f i c e S t o 0 ___
(C) 2 Story Brick R ______ _____
0 5 0 R o w 0
3 Story Brick R ___________ ____
S30 Ro w / 0 f f i c e S t o 0 __ _
(C) 3 Story Brick R _______________
U50 Row/Apts 0 ___ _
(C) 3 1/2 Story Bk R ________ ____
K 1 2 S e m i-d e t / B m t Gar 0 _ _
1 Story Brick R ___________ ____
H 30 Semi-det/Bnt G 0 _ _
2 Story Bk R _______ ____
K30 Semi-det/Bmt G 0 _ _
2 Story Bk R _______ ____
K32 Semi-det/Bmt G 0 _________ _
2 Story Bk/Stone R ________ ____
J30 Semi-det/Bmt G 0 _ _
2 Story Bk R _______ ____
H50 Semi-det 0 _ _
3 Story Brick R ___________ ____
Other 0 _________ _
R ______ ____
Total
Age
.able A. 1 Building Data Allocation
.
Neighborhood_________________ Census Tract I1 - ^
Population___________ Population Density_____________
Household Income, Average_________ % Vacancy_________
Insulation Flat Rf. S Wall Space Heat DHW
Poor/Med/We 11 gas/el/oil gas/el/oil


4 It is therefore estimated that 5# of the homes that are owner-
occupied are well insulated, 15# moderately insulated, and 80#

poorly insulated. Of the rental units, it is assumed that 10# are moderately insulated and 90# are poorly insulated. Field audits to spot check this assumption or comparison of calculated energy use to actual usage in typical houses might further confirm or deny those assumptions.
g. The number of flat and sloped roofs are entered. This is estimated from a knowledge of the neighborhood housing types and a review
from aerial photos.
h. The number of residential buildings with walls facing north of northeast and south or southwest is entered. These numbers come from a computation of city tax files.
i. The number of units using gas, electric, and oil is entered. 2
2. The second form completed in the analysis is the Neighborhood Energy Use Evaluation Worksheet. See Table A2.
a. The total number of units in each housing category is entered
fronthe BUILDING TYPE ALLOCATION WORKSHEET.
b. The characteristic heat loss for each building type is entered from Table A3* This Table was compiled by applying ASHRAE heat loss calculations to typical Philadelphia examples of each housing type.
c. The heat loss per building is calculated by multiplying the characteristic heat loss from Table A3 by 4866, which is the typical number of degree days for Philadelphia, and then by the typical square footage of a Philadelphia house of that type. See Table A4.
d. The total heat loss per building type is calculated and entered. This is the heat loss per building multiplied by the number of buildings.


e. The number of homes using each type of fuel is calculated, by adding the numbers on the Building Type Allocation Worksheet* f. The amount of each type of fuel used per each type of building is calculated and entered. It is assumed from this study that the residential heat loss equals the heating load of the space heating system. It thereby ignores heating caused by appliances and body heat.The heat loss per building is divided by the characteristic number of btu's available for each unit of fuel. The btu's available differs from the number of btus per unit ot fuel according to the operating efficiency of the heating system. For example, although a cubic foot of natural gas can produce from 1000 to 1050 btus, if we assume an overall heating plant efficiency of the actual
heat obtainable from a cubic foot of gas is 780 btu's. Here are the actual heat obtainable figures that were used.
Theoretical Actual Heat Obtainable
No. 2 Oil 137.000 to 141,800 97.300 btus/gallon
btus/gallon
Natural Gas 1000 IO5O btus/cubic ft. 780 btus/cubic ft
Electricity 3413 btus/ KWH 3413 btusAWK
These values are taken from page 642 of the Passive Solar Energy Book, Expanded Professional Edition by Ed Mazria.
g. The total fuel used per building type is calculated. This is the fuel used per building multiplied by the total number of buildings
using the fuel.
3. The third form completed in the analysis process is the Possible
Neighborhood Energy Savings Worksheet. See Table A5.


Table A.2 Energy Use Worksheet
!* Neighborhood:
Building Type:
Midrow Endrow
Owner Renter Owner ' Renter
Total _________ ______________ _________________ _______________
I
Typical SF
Heat Loss Btu/SF/Degree Day
Heat Loss/Building Btu s
Heat Loss/
Building Type TOTAL Btu's
No. Using Gas
Gas Used CF/Bldg/yr
Gas Used TOTAL CF/yr
No. Using Oil
Oil Used gal/Bldg/yr
Oil Used TOTAL gal/yr
No. Using Electric
Electricity Used KwH/Bldg/yr
Electricity Used TOTAL KwH


TABLE A 2
7
MIDROW ENDROW'
* OWNER RENTER OWNER RENTER
TOTAL t
INSULATION LEVEL POOR MED. WELL POOR MED. WELL POOR MED. WELL POOR MED. WEI
TOTAL/LRVEL
BTU/SQ. FT./D. DAY
HEAT L03S/BUILDING
TOTAL LOSS: FOR BUILDING TYPE
# USING GAS 0
GAS U3ED/BUILDING
TOTAL GAS USED
T"
§ USING OIL
OIL USKD/6UILDING
TOTAL OIL USED

# "ING ELECTRIC
ELEC. USED/BUILDINC
am /\mi rT *- *mrr\