Buildings, Energy

1
Buildings, Energy CO2UC/CSU/CCC
Sustainability ConferenceCal Poly San Luis
Obispo, 2008

• UC Davis Orientation
• Policies on Climate Change
• Buildings, Energy and Emissions
• Energy Intensity in Buildings
• Impacts of Growth
• Energy Use Projections
• Visualizing CO2 Emissions
• Energy Futures
• Challenges Opportunities
• Example

2
UC DAVIS UTILITIES
Natural Gas by DGS/PGE

• STEAM
• 2-100,000 PPH
• 1-75,000 PPH
• 150,000 PPH in Construction
• Peak 230,000 PPH
• CHILLED WATER
• 5,000 Tons Electric Chillers
• 3,500 Tons Steam Chillers

Central Plant
Campus Landfill

• Campus Landfill
• Monthly Trash 1,000 Tons

• Thermal Storage Plant
• 4 2,000 Tons Electric Chillers
• 1-40,000 Tons Storage Tank
• Peak 20,000 Tons

Thermal Storage Plant
Electrical Sub-Station

• Electrical Sub-Station
• Peak 45 MVA
• 2006 Annual KWH 246,190,000
• Provider WAPA/PGE

Campus Arboretum Storm Collection Pumped to Putah
Creek

• Campus Wastewater
• Treatment Plant
• 4.2 MGD Peak Day Annual
• 9.6 MGD Peak Hourly Wet Weather

Campus Wastewater Treatment Plant

• 2007 Campus Information
• Acreage 5,200 Acres
• Building GSF 9.9M gsf
• Student Population 38,248

3
POLICIES ON CLIMATE CHANGE

• UC Sustainable Practices Policy
• University will develop a long term strategy for
  voluntarily meeting the State of Californias
  goal, pursuant to the California Global Warming
  Solutions Act of 2006 that is by 2020, to
  reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
• In addition, consistent with the Clean Energy
  Standard sections a., b. and c. of this document,
  the University will pursue the goal of reducing
  GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2014
• and provide an action plan for becoming climate
  neutral

• American College University Presidents Climate
  Commitment
• Within two years of signing this document,
  develop an institutional action plan for becoming
  climate neutral

4
BUILDINGS, ENERGY EMISSIONS

• Source of CO2 Emissions

Source UC Berkeley Climate Action Partnership
Feasibility Study 2006-2007 Final Report
5
MAIN CAMPUS AREA BY BUILDING TYPE

• Gross Square Footage - 1990-2025 (projected)

Data beyond 2016 is for estimating emissions only
6
USES OF ENERGY IN BUILDINGS

• Energy Intensity and End Uses in Various Building
  Types

7
MAIN CAMPUS ENERGY USE
Actual (1994-200) and Projected (1990-2025)
Projected Energy Use (148,860 Metric Tons of CO2)
2020 Reduction Goal
2014 Reduction Goal
Actual Energy Use
2000 Baseline
1990 Baseline
11,822,689 GSF
10,037,600 Gross Square Feet
Building Area
6,150,181 GSF
Campus Population
42,768
38,813 People
29,484
Data beyond 2016 is for estimating emissions only
KBTU
Data beyond 2016 is for estimated emissions only
8
MAIN CAMPUS ENERGY USE
Actual (1994-200) and Projected (1990-2025)
California Title 24
Projected Energy Use (148,860 Metric Tons of CO2)
2020 Reduction Goal
2014 Reduction Goal
Actual Energy Use
2000 Baseline
1990 Baseline
Building Area
Campus Population
Data beyond 2016 is for estimating emissions only
KBTU
9
MAIN CAMPUS ENERGY USE

• Actual, Projected and Options to Come
  (1990-2025)

California Title 24
Projected Energy Use (148,860 Metric Tons of CO2)
2020 Reduction Goal
2014 Reduction Goal
Actual Energy Use
A Conservation Projects
B A User Level
2000 Baseline
1990 Baseline
Building Area
Campus Population
Data beyond 2016 is for estimating emissions only
KBTU
10
ENERGY CONSERVATION

• Most Common Project Types
• Recommissioning, retrocommissioning
• (tuning of existing systems)
• HVAC Retrofits
• Lighting Retrofits
• Control Modifications
• Combined Projects
• (building-wide renovations)
• Movable Equipment Replacement
• (Lab freezers, computer monitors, vending
  machines)

Deficiencies in Existing Buildings The Cost
Effectiveness of Commercial Building
Commissioning, LBNL 2004
11
MAIN CAMPUS ENERGY USE

• Actual, Projected and Options to Come
  (1990-2025)

California Title 24
Projected Energy Use (148,860 Metric Tons of CO2)
2020 Reduction Goal
2014 Reduction Goal
Actual Energy Use
A Conservation Projects
B A User Level
2000 Baseline
C B Plasma Plant
1990 Baseline
Building Area
Campus Population
Data beyond 2016 is for estimating emissions only
KBTU
12
ENERGY GENERATION

• Recovering Energy from Waste

Plasma Gasification
Gasification
Bio-digestion
Incineration
1000-1500 Deg F
900-1200 Deg F
Outside Air Temp Dependent
Above 2,500 Deg F
Ash
Ash
No Ash (glass metal)
Waste Used for AG
Some Inorganics
Some Inorganics
Any Type of Waste
Organic Material
No Sorting (may require shredding)
Requires Sorting
Requires Sorting
Requires Sorting
Small Capacity (can multiply tanks)
Small Capacity Unproven technology
Large Capacity
Large Capacity Unproven technology
Depends on Acidity or Alkalinity of Material
13
ENERGY GENERATION

• Plasma Gasification

Medical Waste Animal Bedding
Mixed Gas and Steam
Municipal Solid Waste
Electrical Arc
Plasma Gasifier
14
ENERGY GENERATION

• Plasma Gasification

Municipal Solid Waste
Heat Exchangers
Steam Turbine
Steam
Gas Clean Up System
Plasma Gasifier
Steam
Electricity
Fuel Gas
Gas Turbine
HCL
Sulfur
Vitrified Glass
Metals
15
MAIN CAMPUS ENERGY USE

• Actual, Projected and Options to Come
  (1990-2025)

California Title 24
Projected Energy Use (148,860 Metric Tons of CO2)
2020 Reduction Goal
2014 Reduction Goal
Actual Energy Use
A Conservation Projects
B A User Level
2000 Baseline
C B Plasma Plant
1990 Baseline
D C Solar
Building Area
Campus Population
Data beyond 2016 is for estimating emissions only
KBTU
16
ENERGY GENERATION

• Renewable Technologies

Solar Electric
Solar Thermal
Wind
Geo-Thermal
No-emissions during operation
No-emissions during operation
Blow-off
No-emissions during operation
Location Specific
Space constraints
Space constraints
Space constraints
Potential for 3rd Party Ownership/Financing
Potential for 3rd Party Ownership/Financing
Proven technology
Potential for 3rd Party Ownership/Financing
Proven technology
Proven technology
Location Specific
Proven technology
17
MAIN CAMPUS ENERGY USE

• Actual, Projected and Options to Come
  (1990-2025)

California Title 24
Projected Energy Use (148,860 Metric Tons of CO2)
2020 Reduction Goal
2014 Reduction Goal
Actual Energy Use
A Conservation Projects
B A User Level
2000 Baseline
C B Plasma Plant
1990 Baseline
D C Solar
E D Slower Growth
Building Area
Campus Population
Data beyond 2016 is for estimating emissions only
KBTU
18
ENERGY FUTURES

• Plan A
• Increase energy efficiency goals on all new
  projects to 30 better than T24
• Implement 480,000,000 kbtu of Energy Efficiency
  Projects from the Strategic Energy Plan in
  2009-2014
• Implement 210,000,000 kbtu of Energy Efficiency
  Projects from the future Strategic Energy Plan in
  2015-2021

• Plan B
• In addition to the above Implement an
  integrated occupant side energy efficiency
  program with equipment replacement, setpoint
  adjustments, water use reduction, building
  shading, user participation in energy management

• Plan C
• In addition to the above Construct a 3MW Plasma
  Gasification Plant burning campus solid waste to
  generate steam and electricity

• Plan D
• In addition to the above Construct a 3.6 MW
  Photovoltaic Array

• Plan E
• In addition to the above Slow construction of
  additional buildings to ½ the current rate

19
CHALLENGES OPPORTUNITIES ENERGY CONSERVATION

• Principal Agent Problem
• Majority of campus departments are not
  responsible for utility costs
• Limited metering creates a cost barrier for
  tracking and reporting energy use

• Budget
• Most departments are faced with cuts of 3 to 10
  for the near future
• Ongoing utility deficit

• Project - Based Funding
• Funding based on individual projects limits
  development of long term resources for ongoing
  energy conservation programs such as integrated
  approaches with an occupant component

• Credit for Energy Efficient Practices
• Allow departments to count reductions in their
  energy use as part of their budget cuts

• CO2 Reduction Program Funding
• Create a project-independent funding source with
  the annual amount based on the campus emissions
  total multiplied by the current market cost of
  high-standard carbon offsets

20
EXAMPLE QUANTIFYING GHG IMPACTS

• GHG emissions from construction and operation of
  a new building
• Energy to extract, fabricate and deliver
  construction materials (Embodied energy)
• Energy for construction on site (Embodied energy)
• Energy for operating the building (building and
  process)
• Energy for maintaining the building
• Energy to renovate, demolish and dispose of
  building
• Other emissions (refrigerants, nitrous oxide,
  methane) associated with any of the above

21
EXAMPLE QUANTIFYING GHG IMPACTS
GHG emissions from building operating energy


http//www.climateregistry.org/resources/docs/pr
otocols/grp/GRP_V3_April2008_FINAL.pdf - Appendix
C and E
22
POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS FROM HIGH PERFORMANCE
BUILDINGS
Modeled improvements in energy efficiency on
recent buildings
23
EXAMPLE QUANTIFYING GHG IMPACTS

• GHG emissions from construction of a new building
• Energy to extract, fabricate and deliver
  construction materials (Embodied energy)
• For the Vet Med 3B example, Concrete foundation,
  Structural Steel and Decking and Concrete Topping
  slabs generate 1,281 metric tons of CO2e and
  account for approximately 15 of the building
  cost. Extrapolating this to the total building
  generates a figure of 8,540 tons. The Rosenfeld
  10 rule generates 19,000 metric tons of CO2e.
• 8,540 tons is 5.5 years worth of the baseline
  annual energy use and 12.3 years worth of the
  design case.
• Energy for construction on site (Embodied energy)
• Energy for operating the building (building and
  process)
• Energy for maintaining the building
• Energy to renovate, demolish and dispose of
  building
• Other emissions (refrigerants, nitrous oxide,
  methane) associated with any of the above

24
PLANNING AND DESIGNING FOR REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS

• LEED Credits that support reductions in GHG
  emissions

• Sustainable Sites
• SS Credit 2 Development Density and Community
  Connectivity
• SS Credit 4.1 Public Transportation Access
• SS Credit 4.2 Alternative Transportation
  Bicycle Storage Changing Rooms
• SS Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation Low
  Emitting Fuel Efficient Vehicles
• SS Credit 4.4 Alternative Transportation
  Parking Capacity

• Source LEED A critical evaluation by LCA and
  recommendations for improvement Humbert, Abeck,
  Bali, and Horvath International Journal of Life
  Cycle Association 2006

25
PLANNING AND DESIGNING FOR REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS

• LEED Credits that support reductions in GHG
  emissions

• Energy and Atmosphere
• EA Credit 1 Optimize Energy Performance
• EA Credit 2 On-Site Renewable Energy
• EA Credit 6 Green Power

26
PLANNING AND DESIGNING FOR REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS

• LEED Credits that support reductions in GHG
  emissions

• Materials and Resources
• MR Prerequisite 1 Storage Collection of
  Recyclables
• MR Credit 1.1 Building Reuse Maintain 75 of
  Existing Walls, Floors Roof
• MR Credit 1.2 Building Reuse Maintain 95 of
  Existing Walls, Floors Roof
• MR Credit 1.3 Building Reuse Maintain 50 of
  Interior Non-Structural Elements

27
PLANNING AND DESIGNING FOR REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS

• The Optimum Project?
• Renovate an existing building close to housing
  and community services to
• Serve more program (higher utilization)
• Run more energy efficiently
• Be easy to maintain and renovate over time
• Use renewable energy sources

28
PLANNING AND DESIGNING FOR REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS

• Strong policy drivers are needed
• Growth What is the potential
  to mine for space in existing stockpile?
• Begin tracking the cost of
  space.
• Energy Supply Large scale impact with many
  potential technologies, some site specific.
• Infrastructure Potential for linking
  building and plant efforts. Elimination of 2nd
  Merced plant.
• Renovation Fundamental opportunity
  but most diffuse and incremental.
• New Buildings One chance to avoid locking
  in less efficient strategies and technologies.

29

• SourceWRI, Navigating the numbers, GHG Emissions
  Flow http//www.wri.org/powerpoints/navigatingthen
  umbers_cop11.ppt310,9,Slide 9

30
(No Transcript)
31
USES OF ENERGY IN BUILDINGS

• Building Energy Intensity (KBTU/SF)

32
QUESTIONS ?

• This concludes the American Institute of
  Architects Continuing Education Systems Program.