PURPOSE OF CASE STUDY Often people express the opinion that more heat is required regaining daytime temperature, than is saved over night, if night temperature reduction is used. Based on this opinion, they control their houses to daytime temperatures, both day and night. This case study graphically disproves this opinion illustrating the energy use of one house under three operational scenarios. (1) The house operating at 21°C (70°F) day and night. (2) The house operating at 21°C (70°F) day and 14.5°C (58°F) night. (3) The house operating at 17.2°C (63°F) day and 14.5°C (58°F) night. This single point of false information contributes cumulative damage to our children's future by causing excessive emission of green house gasses into the atmosphere. We wish to address this situation, saving families money, as well as relieving the environment of the additional pollution burden. (Work with your heating experts to assess the best set up for your house.) DATA COLLECTION METHOD The component arrangement allowed reading and graphing the boiler's percentage firing time, the outside temperature and the indoor temperature. The readings occurred every eight seconds and averaged into forty second logging points. ANALYSIS OF DATA We consider the relative run time of the boiler, while running under the three different scenarios, the indicator of comparative energy use. GENERAL We have focused on improving building energy performance since 1976 in commercial, industrial and institutional environments. The vast majority of buildings required a multiple front approach to reducing energy use with night set back being only one of many techniques simultaneously employed. Although night set back has been a factor in nearly all, there are only two examples allowing isolation of the benefit relating to night set back. (1) In 1976, we worked in cooperation with the Scarborough Board of Education assessing the relative savings as different techniques were employed. We used an identical building, built to the same specifications as our test building, as a control reference. The energy use reduction relating to only night set back was 15%, while the total energy reduction employing the three tested techniques simultaneously, was 43%. (2) The oil section of Wendell Statton S., PS in Scarborough only enjoyed the benefit of night set back allowing a 19.5% reduction in energy use. (See chart page 8-158) The dollar saving in this case study is significant, comparing the house at a constant 70°F to its normal operation; however, this case study is not about saving dollars. It is intended as one technical document, added to our collective effort, in the attempt to preserve the children's future. 8.151
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODY1ODQy