HVAC Upgrade + Electrification Decision Kit

Turn energy baselines into a decision: where to act first, what to do, how to justify it (not engineering advice)

Scope 3, Made PracticalDecision Kit90 min

Important: This is a decision framework, not engineering advice. Engage qualified engineers and contractors for design and safety.

What you'll accomplish

  • Identify which buildings/systems are best candidates for HVAC upgrades and electrification
  • Build a minimum viable baseline (kWh, fuel, maintenance pain, comfort risk)
  • Compare options (controls → retro-commissioning → equipment replacement → electrification)
  • Create an executive-ready decision memo with scenarios, risks, and next steps
  • Launch a pilot plan that reduces regret and increases learning

Who this is for

Owners/operators

Planning portfolio improvements

Facilities/engineering teams

Managing HVAC systems

Finance teams

Evaluating capex decisions

Sustainability teams

Linking actions to emissions reduction

Prerequisites

Scope 2 Utility Data Pipeline Starter KitScope 1 Basics Starter KitMetering Strategy PlaybookOptional

Quick start (90 minutes)

Pick 3–5 candidate buildings:

  • Build the Building Candidate Scorecard (Template 1)
  • Pull last 12 months of kWh and fuel usage (if applicable)
  • Fill the Equipment Snapshot (Template 2)
  • Select 2 upgrade pathways per building (Template 3)
  • Draft the Decision Memo skeleton (Template 5)

The upgrade ladder (start with highest leverage, lowest regret)

Most HVAC/electrification wins happen in this order:

1

Operations + controls

Schedules, setpoints, controls tuning

2

Retro-commissioning / recommissioning

Fix how systems operate

3

Targeted component upgrades

VFDs, controls, sensors

4

Major equipment replacement

High-efficiency units

5

Electrification

Heat pumps, electrified DHW, boiler replacement

Beginner rule: Don't jump to electrification before you know your baseline and constraints.

Step-by-step decision framework

1

Choose your objective (pick 1–2 primary)

Reduce operating cost volatility • Reduce outage/comfort risk • Reduce emissions • Meet compliance / building standards • Prepare for tenant requirements

Done looks like: A clear definition of "success" for the project.

2

Shortlist buildings using a scorecard

Focus on: high energy use intensity (EUI proxy), high gas use (if relevant), equipment at end of life, high maintenance cost and repeat issues, tenant comfort complaints, upcoming capex cycle (roof, TI, major renovation).

3

Gather minimum viable inputs

Minimum: 12 months electricity kWh (by billing period), 12 months fuel use (if you control fuel), equipment age/type and major constraints, major maintenance pain points. Optional: peak demand charges (kW), electrical capacity constraints, incentive opportunities.

4

Pick upgrade pathways (2 per building)

Choose a "low regret" and a "transformational" option. Example: Path A: controls + retro-commissioning + targeted upgrades. Path B: equipment replacement + heat pumps + electrified DHW (where feasible).

5

Build a simple economics + risk model

Use: capex estimate range (low/base/high), savings estimate range (low/base/high), risk score (operational disruption, tenant impact, electrical capacity, permitting).

6

Decide: pilot vs scale

Most teams should pilot first: 1–3 buildings, clear measurement plan, clear learning agenda.

Templates included

Template 1 — Building Candidate Scorecard (copy/paste)

| Building | Size | Lease type | Energy pain (1–5) | Maintenance pain (1–5) | Comfort risk (1–5) | Equipment EOL soon? (Y/N) | Electrification feasibility (H/M/L) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---:|---:|---:|---|---|---|

Template 2 — Equipment Snapshot (copy/paste)

| Building | System | Equipment type | Age | Condition | Controls quality (H/M/L) | Major issues | Replacement window | Notes |
|---|---|---|---:|---|---|---|---|---|

Template 3 — Option Comparison Matrix (copy/paste)

| Option | Capex ($) | Savings ($/yr) | Emissions impact | Disruption risk | Feasibility | Notes |
|---|---:|---:|---|---|---|---|
| Controls tuning |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Retro-commissioning |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Component upgrades |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Equipment replacement |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Electrification (heat pumps) |  |  |  |  |  |  |

Template 4 — Risk Register (copy/paste)

| Risk | Likelihood (L/M/H) | Impact (L/M/H) | Mitigation | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electrical capacity insufficient |  |  |  |  |
| Tenant disruption / access limits |  |  |  |  |
| Permitting delays |  |  |  |  |
| Comfort complaints during transition |  |  |  |  |
| Savings uncertainty |  |  |  |  |

Template 5 — Executive Decision Memo (copy/paste)

HVAC Upgrade / Electrification Decision Memo

Building(s):
Objective(s):
Current pain:
- energy cost volatility:
- maintenance issues:
- comfort risk:

Baseline inputs:
- electricity (kWh, last 12 months):
- fuel (if applicable):
- key equipment and age:

Options considered:
Option A (low regret):
- scope:
- capex range:
- savings range:
- risks:

Option B (transformational):
- scope:
- capex range:
- savings range:
- risks:

Recommendation:
[ ] Pilot
[ ] Scale
Why:

Measurement plan (M&V):
- what we will measure:
- data sources:
- timeline:

Decision needed:
- budget approval:
- pilot timeline:
- next steps and owners:

Template 6 — Measurement and Verification (M and V) Starter

M&V Starter Plan

Baseline period:
Data sources (utility bills, submetering, BMS):
Normalization approach (weather/occupancy if used):
KPIs:
- kWh change
- fuel use change
- comfort complaints (count)
- maintenance tickets (count)
Cadence:
- monthly review for 6–12 months

Common pitfalls

  • ✗Jumping to major replacements without fixing controls and operations
  • ✗No baseline → no way to prove impact
  • ✗No tenant access plan → delays and conflict
  • ✗Not considering electrical capacity constraints early
  • ✗Overconfidence in point savings estimates (use ranges and pilot)

How to prove impact

Measured kWh and/or fuel reductions

vs baseline

Reduced comfort complaints

and emergency calls

Reduced repeat repairs

lower maintenance burden

Documented learning from pilot

that improves scale decisions

Evidence and Confidence

Confidence:Medium-High(decision framework is stable; engineering details vary)

Assumptions: You can access utility data and basic equipment info.

Where this can fail: If constraints (electrical capacity, tenant access, permitting) are not identified early.

Change log

v1.0 (2026-01): Latest release