Issuu on Google+

Barnard Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis 2005 University Emissions Inventory

4/15/2008


Credits and Acknowledgements Name of University Lisa Gamsu, Vice President for Administration & Capital Planning Julio Vazquez, Director, Office of Facilities Services Daniel Davis, Associate Director, Office of Facilities Services Fran Rooney, Luthin Associates Rakesh Parasuraman, Luthin Associates New York City Laurie Kerr, NYC Mayoral Challenge Melissa Wright, Policy Advisor on Energy and Special Projects NYC Mayor's Office of Operations

ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability Melissa Stults, Program Officer, ICLEI


Table of Contents 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................1 1.1 Climate Change Background.....................................................................................1 1.2 The New York City Mayoral Challenge....................................................................2 1.3 The Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) Campaign..................................................2 2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory .............................................................................3 2.1 ICLEI Methodology and Model.................................................................................3 2.1 New York City Methodology and Model..................................................................3 2.1.1 CACP Software.................................................................................................5 2.2.2 Creating the Inventory........................................................................................5 2.2 University Inventory Results.....................................................................................6 3 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................10 Appendix 2 Barnard Emissions in 2005: Detailed Report with Notes..........................13


1 Introduction On Earth Day 2007, Mayor Bloomberg released PlaNYC, New York City’s comprehensive longterm sustainability plan. PlaNYC presents 127 initiatives designed to reduce the city’s greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. PlaNYC also contains a commitment to reduce emissions from City government operations and facilities by 30 percent below 2006 levels by 2017. To assist in achieving emissions reductions in the community, Mayor Bloomberg announced the NYC Mayoral Challenge – an initiative to reduce emissions in NYC Universities and Colleges by 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2017. This document represents work by Barnard College to complete phase one of the New York City Mayoral Challenge – completion of an emissions inventory. Presented here are estimates of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from University buildings and vehicle fleets. Due to data availability, our inventory is based on year 2005. This data will provide a baseline against which we will be able to compare future performance, enabling us to demonstrate progress in reducing emissions. 1.1 Climate Change Background A balance of naturally occurring gases dispersed in the atmosphere determines the Earth’s climate by trapping solar heat. This phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect. Modern human activity, most notably the burning of fossil fuels for transportation, electricity generation, and building heat and hot water, introduces large amounts of carbon dioxide and other gases into the atmosphere. Collectively, these gases intensify the natural greenhouse effect, causing global average surface temperature to rise, which is in turn is expected to affect global climate patterns. Overwhelming evidence suggests that human activities are increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, causing a rise in global average surface temperature and consequent climate change. In response to the threat of climate change, communities worldwide are taking action to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. In New York City, the sheer scale of the city means that it emits nearly 0.25% of the world’s total greenhouse gases. Therefore, becoming more efficient will have a tangible impact. New York City is amending its building code and working to protect its infrastructure from the inevitable impacts of climate change. But the massive changes that scientists predict under extreme scenarios would still place large areas of the city underwater and beyond the reach of any protective measures. Beyond our community, scientists also expect changing temperatures to result in more intense storms accompanied by flooding and land slides, summer water shortages as a result of reduced snow pack, and disruption of ecosystems, habitats and agricultural activities.

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

1


1.2 The New York City Mayoral Challenge In June 2007 Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg announced that ten universities accepted his challenge for reducing their greenhouse emissions 30% by 2017, matching the commitment the Mayor made for emissions reductions from City operations. Each of the universities, known as 2030 Challenge Partners, are creating an inventory of their greenhouse gas emissions along with a plan for how they intend to achieve their reductions. New York City’s first-ever carbon emissions inventory found that energy use in buildings accounts for almost 80% of the City's overall emissions, and of that, 18% is from governmental and institutional buildings. By accepting the challenge, the university Challenge Partners are leading by example in helping to make a sizable dent in the City's overall emissions. The City is working with all of its Challenge Partners to share best practices and develop a body of knowledge that can help all of them achieve the target with maximum efficiency.

1.3 The Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) Campaign While Barnard will be abiding by the terms laid out in the NYC Mayoral Challenge, it is important to note that New York City is formally a member of ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability. By joining ICLEI, New York City has joined an international movement of local governments. More than 800 local governments, including over 350 in the United States, have joined ICLEI’s Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) campaign.1 In addition to New York City the neighboring municipalities of Westchester County, Suffolk County, Nassau County, Yonkers, Yorktown, and many more, are all Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) participants. The CCP campaign provides a framework for local communities to identify and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, organized along five milestones: (1) Conduct an inventory of local greenhouse gas emissions; (2) Establish a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target; (3) Develop an action plan for achieving the emissions reduction target; (4) Implement the action plan; and, (5) Monitor and report on progress. While Mayoral Challenge participants are not formally members or ICLEI, as part of New York City, participants have followed a similar framework as provided above. As such, this report represents the completion of the first CCP milestone – completion of a greenhouse gas inventory, and provides a foundation for future work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Barnard College.

1

ICLEI was formerly known as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, but the name has been changed to ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability.

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

2


2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory The first step toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions is to identify baseline levels and sources of emissions in Barnard College. This information can later inform the selection of a reduction target and possible reduction measures.

2.1 ICLEI Methodology and Model ICLEI’s Cities for Climate Protection methodology assists local governments in systematically tracking energy and waste related activities in the community, and to calculate the relative quantities of greenhouse gases produced by each activity and sector. Once completed, the inventory provides the basis for the creation of an emission forecast, and allows for the quantification of emissions reductions associated with proposed measures.

2.1 New York City Methodology and Model

What to Count In order to allow for ease and consistency, the NYC Mayoral Challenge asks that parties only calculate their energy use and associated emissions emitted in the operation of buildings, campus grounds, and fleets. The buildings and fleets to be included should include, at a minimum, all buildings and vehicles owned and operated by the university. Universities are encouraged to track the emissions of their rental properties and rental vehicles if possible; however rentals do not need to be counted in the total, given that the university’s lack of control over their emissions. The Challenge recognizing that control is central to being held accountable for savings. Therefore rental buildings or other properties over which the University does not have total control need not be counted toward the total. Energy Use per Square Foot The 30% reduction will be calculated on a per square foot basis of buildings owned and operated by the university. As such, all Universities were asked to report their usage numbers on a per square footage basis. Leased Space To be determined… Coefficients In order to allow for compliance with New York City’s emissions inventory, coefficients for electricity and steam were taken directly from the methodology derived from the NYC inventory. Emissions for electricity equated to 1,038 lbs/MWh and steam, 76.478 lbs/MMBtu. To convert steam from units of Mlbs (thousands of pounds), as is metered, to MMBtu, Mlbs is multiplied by 1.687. Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

3


Selection of Baseline Inventory Year All participants were given the opportunity to choose fiscal year 2000-2001 or 2005-2006 as a baseline year. Documenting Methodology All Universities are required to provide detailed notes regarding how and where their energy use data was derived. This information can be found in this report as well as in the ICLEI – Clean Air and Climate Protection software. Renewable Energy Credits The intent of the Challenge is to increase the efficiency of New York City’s buildings and fleets, therefore, green power purchases made elsewhere should form a minimal part of each University efficiency portfolio. The Challenge states that Renewable offsite power purchases can count for no more than 15% of the total reduction of 30% required, or 4.5%. Purchase contracts must be long-term, lasting at least through 2030. Carbon Offset Credits The Challenge states that offsite carbon offset credit purchases count for no more than 5% of the total reduction of 30% required, or 1.5%. Additional Information Universities are encouraged to track more information than is required to meet the Challenge, such as information on rental properties or CO2e generated by waste or the transport of materials. Other sources of CO2e emissions, such as waste or the transport of materials, can be tracked and even counted toward the total. But they are not required, and a more complex analysis should not delay the development of an inventory of the emissions from the university’s buildings, grounds, and fleets. Updating Inventories Inventories should be updated annually and include, at the minimum, all buildings and fleets owned and operated by the University.

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

4


2.1.1

CACP Software

To facilitate community efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ICLEI developed the Clean Air and Climate Protection (CACP) software package with the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators (STAPPA), the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials (ALAPCO), and Torrie Smith Associates. This software calculates emissions resulting from energy consumption and waste generation. The CACP software determines emissions using specific factors (or coefficients) according to the type of fuel used. Greenhouse gas emissions are aggregated and reported in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent units, or CO2e. Converting all emissions to carbon dioxide equivalent units allows for the consideration of different greenhouse gases in comparable terms. For example, methane is twenty-one times more powerful than carbon dioxide on a per molecule basis in its capacity to trap heat, so the CACP software converts one ton of methane emissions to 21 tons of carbon dioxide equivalents. The CACP software is also capable of reporting input and output data in several formats, including detailed, aggregate, source-based and time-series reports. The emissions coefficients and methodology employed by the CACP software are consistent with national and international inventory standards established by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1996 Revised IPCC Guidelines for the Preparation of National Inventories) and the U.S. Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Reporting Guidelines (EIA form1605). However, for the NYC Mayoral Challenge, we utilized New York City specific coefficients for steam and electricity, corresponding to 76.478 lbs/MMBTU (steam) and 1,038 lbs/MWh (electricity), respectively. The CACP software has been and continues to be used by over 350 U.S. cities, towns, and counties to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. However, it is worth noting that, although the software provides both New York City and Barnard College with a sophisticated and useful tool, calculating emissions from energy use with precision is difficult. The model depends upon numerous assumptions, and it is limited by the quantity and quality of available data. With this in mind, it is useful to think of any specific number generated by the model as an approximation of reality, rather than an exact value. 2.2.2 Creating the Inventory Barnard’s greenhouse gas emissions inventory consists of an assessment of all energy used in buildings and vehicle fleet. Creating our emissions inventory required the collection of information from a variety of sources (See Appendix 2 for inventory source data.) Data from the year 2005 was used for the baseline inventory. When calculating Barnard’s emissions inventory, all energy consumed in Barnard buildings and fleet was included. This means that, even though the electricity used by Barnard College students and residents is produced elsewhere, this energy and the emissions associated with it appears in Barnard’s inventory. The decision to calculate emissions in this manner reflects the general philosophy that an entity should take full responsibility for the impacts associated with its energy consumption, regardless of whether or not the energy generation occurs within its geographic borders. This is consistent with the ICLEI protocol developed for its local government members. Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

5


2.2 University Inventory Results In the base year 2005, Barnard emitted approximately 12,890 tons of CO2e. As shown in Table 1, and illustrated in the chart below, Electricity use was the greatest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions at 40.2.1% of the total. Other sectors: Fuel Oil contributed 35.9%, and Natural Gas contributed 23.8% Barnard’s total greenhouse gas output. Table 1: Barnard -Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005 Greenhouse Energy Gas Sector Equivalent Emissions (MMBtu) (tons CO2e) Buildings 12,887 138,484 Fleet 3 38 Street lights Total 12,890 138,522

Figure 1. Barnard -Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005

160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000

Buildings Fleet Streetlights Total

20,000 0

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

6


In the base year 2005, Barnard emitted approximately 12,890 tons of CO2e. As shown in Table 1, and illustrated in the chart below, Electricity use was the greatest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions at 40.2 of the total. Other sectors: Fuel Oil contributed 35.9%, and Natural Gas contributed 23.8% Barnard’s total greenhouse gas output. Table 2A: Barnard -Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005 by Source

Source Electricity Fuel Oil Natural Gas Gasoline Diesel TOTAL

C02 % 40.2 35.9 23.8 0 0 100%

C02 (Tons) 5,184 4,633 3,070 3 1 12,890

Energy (MMBtu) 32,747 56,050 49,687 30 7 138,522

Figure 1A. Barnard -Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

7


Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

8


Barnard’s consumption of electricity and other fuels in local buildings and vehicles is also responsible for the release of criteria air pollutants, including NOX, SOX, CO, VOCs, and PM10. The Buildings sector is responsible for the majority of NOX, CO and VOC emissions as well as emissions of SOX and PM10. Table 2. Barnard Community-Wide Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions in 2005

Sector Buildings Fleet Streetlights Total

NOX (lbs)

SOX (lbs)

CO (lbs)

VOCs (tons)

PM10 (tons)

33,354 15

78,670 1

15,114 148

2,084 16

10,680 1

33,369

78,671

15,263

2,100

10,680

Table 3. Barnard Building Energy Use Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005 2

3009 Broadway 42 Claremont 1235 Amsterdam 49 Claremont 600 W 116 St 616 W 116 St 620 W 116 St

419,700 275,000 84,000 34,000 99,000 59,000 59,000

Electricity Use (kWh) 1,638,000 6,029,560 575,000 555,600 75,906 309,600 143,400

Buildings Total

1,029,70 0

9,327,066

Site

Area (sq ft)

Electricity Cost ($) $287,496 $1,077,417 $287,496 $92,,201 $14,408 $57,809 $24,063

Natural Gas Use (therms) 172,494 236,033 24,228 19,737 15,326 234 21

Natural Gas Cost ($) $429,527 $607,200 $93,043 $48,442 $81,482 $50,245 $98,265

1,748,689

468,073

1,408,204

Energy Equivalent (MMBtu) 44,248 64,972 7,960 3,909 6,302 4,296 5,228

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (tons CO2e) 3,720 6,504 756 425 509 435 442

138,522

12,890

2

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

9


Table 4. Barnard Street and Traffic Lighting Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005

Electricity Use (kWh)

Site

Electricity Cost ($)

Energy Equivalent (MMBtu)

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (tons CO2e)

Street Lighting Public Safety Lighting Ball field lighting Parking Lot Street & Traffic Total

Table 6. Barnard Vehicle Fleet Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005 Department EMS Public Works Public Safety Transit Buses Vehicle Fleet Total

Gasoline Consumption (gal)

Diesel Consumption (gal)

Total Fuel Cost ($)

Energy Equivalent (MMBtu)

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (tons CO2e)

6,807

15,452

38

3

6,807

15,452

38

3

Data compiled on energy use to help Barnard inventory was obtained from Luthin Associates. Detailed notes on the information provided, can be found in the notes section of Appendix II.

3 Conclusion In joining ICLEI and the Cities for Climate Protection™ Campaign, New York City made a commitment to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases. This commitment was furthered by the passage of Local Law 55 of 2007, which requires the city to reduce citywide greenhouse gas emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030, and emissions from City government operations and facilities by 30% below 2006 levels by 2017. As part of that commitment, Mayor Bloomberg started the NYC Mayoral Challenge to inspire local universities and colleges to reduce their energy consumption. This report lays the groundwork for those efforts by estimating baseline emissions levels against which future progress can be demonstrated. This analysis found that the Barnard as a whole was responsible for emitting 12,890 tons of CO2e in the base year 2005, with the buildings, fleet, and street lighting sectors contributing roughly equal amounts to this total. These emissions are roughly X percentage of total New York City community-wide emissions. Following the ICLEI methodology, we recommend that Barnard next forecast anticipated future emissions, begin to document emissions reduction measures that have already been implemented Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

10


since the base years documented in this report, and quantify the emissions benefits of these measures to demonstrate progress made to date. Next the Barnard Barnard should begin to identify potential new emissions reduction measures that might be implemented in the future, including energy efficiency, clean energy, vehicle fuel efficiency or alternative fuel use, trip reduction strategies, and other projects. Hundreds of local governments from around the world have successfully saved money and enhanced community livability through taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and Barnard can easily join their ranks.

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

11


Appendix 1 University-Wide Emissions Inventory Source Data for Year Barnard Building Energy Use Site

Area (sq ft)

Electricity Use (kWh)

Electricity Cost ($)

Natural Gas Use (therms)

Natural Gas Cost ($)

Subtotal Buildings

Data provided by:

Barnard Street Lighting Site

Electricity Use (kWh)

Electricity Cost ($)

Street Lighting Outdoor Lighting Parking Lot Parking Lot

Subtotal Street & Traffic

Data provided by:

Barnard Vehicle Fleet Department

Gasoline Consumption (gal)

Diesel Consumption (gal)

Total Fuel Cost ($)

EMS Public Safety Public Works Buses Subtotal Vehicle Fleet

Data provided by:

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

12


Appendix 2

Barnard Emissions in 2005: Detailed Report with Notes

Government Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005

Detailed Report

Equiv CO 2 (tons)

Equiv CO 2 (%)

Energy (MMBtu)

Cost ($)

Barnard College, New York Buildings 1235 Amsterdam Electricity Light Fuel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 1235 Amsterdam

311 296 150 756

2.4 2.3 1.2 5.9

1,962 3,575 2,423 7,960

0 0 0 0

3009 Broadway (Brooks) Electricity Light Fuel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 3009 Broadway

885 1,770 1,066 3,720

6.9 13.7 8.3 28.9

5,590 21,408 17,249 44,248

0 0 0 0

42 Claremont Electricity Light Fuel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 42 Claremont

3,402 1,643 1,458 6,504

26.4 12.7 11.3 50.5

21,493 19,876 23,603 64,972

0 0 0 0

49 Claremont Electricity Light Fuel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 49 Claremont

300 3 122 425

2.3 0.0 0.9 3.3

1,896 39 1,974 3,909

0 0 0 0

41 373 95 509

0.3 2.9 0.7 3.9

259 4,511 1,533 6,302

0 0 0 0

600 W 116th St Electricity Light Fuel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 600 W 116th St

This report has been generated for Barnard College, New York using STAPPA/ALAPCO and ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection Software developed by Torrie Smith Associates Inc.

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

13


Page 2 Government Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005

Detailed Report

Equiv CO 2 (tons)

Equiv CO 2 (%)

Energy (MMBtu)

Cost ($)

616 W 116th St Electricity Light Fuel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 616 W 116th St

167 266 1 435

1.3 2.1 0.0 3.4

1,057 3,216 24 4,296

0 0 0 0

620 W 116th St Electricity Light Fuel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 620 W 116th St

77 283 81 442

0.6 2.2 0.6 3.4

489 3,426 1,313 5,228

0 0 0 0

All Residential Accounts Natural Gas Subtotal Residential Accounts

97 97

0.8 0.8

1,568 1,568

0 0

Subtotal Buildings

12,887

100.0

138,484

0

Vehicle Fleet Barnard College, New York Barnard Fleet Gasoline Diesel Subtotal Barnard Fleet Subtotal Vehicle Fleet

3 1 3 3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

30 7 38 38

0 0 0 0

Total

12,890

100.0

138,522

0

This report has been generated for Barnard, in New York City, New York using STAPPA/ALAPCO and ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection Software developed by Torrie Smith Associates Inc.

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

14


Barnard College: Preliminary Analysis and Programming To the extent that meeting Mayor Bloomberg’s initiative is not a momentary event, but a longterm and permanent commitment in how Barnard College approaches its energy use, this report outlines Project Opportunities and Benefits Implementing the performance opportunities identified during this study will result in a combination of benefits, including energy savings, infrastructure improvements, operational improvements, and planning support. These benefits include the following: 1.

Automation of energy using systems using DDC systems.

2.

A campus lighting retrofit plan that provides improved lighting quality and substantial energy savings.

3.

Upgrade heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment at or near the end of its life cycle with more efficient equipment that will allow operational efforts to be focused elsewhere.

4.

Reclaim waste energy, where economically appropriate.

5.

Application of sustainable energy technologies (such as wind and solar), where economically appropriate.

6.

The ability to look at all of these performance improvements in light of future growth plans and expectations.

Energy Conservation Measure Summary The following section describes in more detail those opportunities for energy and water conservation measures (EWCMs) that have been identified as candidates for inclusion in a performance contracting scope of work at Barnard College. The following table summarizes the main EWCM groupings, and where they would potentially be implemented. Preliminary ECM Summary 1

Steam System Improvements Steam Trap Survey Insulate bare pipe/fittings/valves/tanks Building load metering/monitoring

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

15


2

Boiler Plant Improvements Install new, efficient, modular boilers Install VFDs on larger hot water pumps Preheat combustion air with waste heats

3

Chiller Plant Improvements Replace absorption chillers with electric Install VFD on cooling tower fans

4

Controls Planning and Improvements Migration to new campus-wide infrastructure Digital real-time monitoring and automatic logging Install self-contained radiator valve

5

Building Electrical System Improvements Wind turbine installation Install electrical sub-meters to track building energy use

6

Air-side HVAC Improvements Variable Air Volume (VAV) HVAC conversion VAV control on kitchen hoods and makeup airs VAV control on chemical fume hood exhaust system Air system infrastructure improvement

7

Lighting System Improvements Retrofit T12/magnetic with T8/electronic Occupancy sensors Other lighting retrofits

8

Heat Recovery Opportunities Install pool dehumidification/HR in pool Install heat pumps in mech. rooms to preheat Air-side and water-side heat recovery Food service compressor room preheat DHW

9

Water Conservation Replace shower heads to reduce DHW load VFDs on domestic water booster pumps Install low flow fixtures

10

Building Envelope Improvements Window seals on AC units

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

16


Apply window film to control solar load Replace single pane windows with double pane 11

Miscellaneous Energy Projects Cogeneration Vending Machine cycling Install thermal storage

E N E R G Y A N D W A T ER C O N S E R V A T I O N M E A S U R E S Steam System Improvements Opportunity Potential Scope Items The steam distribution system is served by two boiler plants (Brooks, Altschul). In general, the steam distribution system is functioning well. However, there is little available data on where the steam is used in the various buildings. A few steam traps may have failed, though most appear to be well maintained. Most steam and condensate piping is insulated. This EWCM is focused on ringing out the last few percent of steam distribution efficiency. The typical payback time is short for these kinds of projects. Metering projects can have a longer payback. Steam Trap Survey Insulate bare pipe/fittings/valves/tanks Building load metering/monitoring Boiler Plant Improvements Opportunity Potential Scope Items Several of the buildings have steam boilers that are at or near the end of their life cycle. As the boilers are replaced, they can be converted from steam to hot water resulting in higher efficiency (low fuel use). All boiler room require combustion (outside) air by code. For the larger boilers, waste heat can be captured and be used to pre-heat combustion air. Payback periods for boiler replacements are often moderate to long. If immediate replacement is required, paybacks are often short. Waste heat recovery is often a short payback. In some buildings where steam is converted into hot water for building heat, many of the pumps are constant volume pumps. Variable frequency drives (VFDs) can be installed and controlled to reduce pumping energy. Implementing variable speed pumping can yield a short payback period. Install new, efficient, modular boilers Preheat combustion air with waste heat Install VFDs on larger hot water pumps Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

17


Chiller Plant Improvements Opportunity Potential Scope Items The two chiller plants that serve the campus use absorption technology. The single affect absorption chiller that serves part of the south campus is at or near the end of its life cycle. Due to the way in which it was installed, certain necessary maintenance cannot be performed. The single affect absorption chiller is an inherently inefficient machine—about 1/10 as efficient as an electric chiller. Because the cost of gas is much higher than several years ago and electric chillers have become significantly more efficient, a new electric chiller will cost less to operate than a new absorption chiller. The payback for this kind of project is moderate to long. If equipment will be replaced immediately, payback periods are shorter. Replace absorption chillers with electric Install VFD on cooling tower fan Opportunity Cooling tower fans are either constant speed or two-speed. Using variable frequency drives, significant energy savings are possible by precisely matching the cooling tower fan speed with the heat rejection load on the tower. Fan energy can be reduced. Payback periods are usually short. Controls Planning and Improvements Opportunity Potential Scope Items A variety of automatic temperature control systems are installed across campus. New directdigital controls (DDC) are being installed in the Nexus Building, which are latest generation controls. Other buildings on campus have controls that are equal to the age of the buildings in which they were installed. The older controls range from still functioning to disconnected. With the older controls, some of the building comfort levels are not maintained as well as possible and energy use is higher then necessary. The maintenance staff cannot see what areas of campus are working well on an hourly or daily basis without physically checking. Installing new DDC controls across campus will allow greater control of temperature and comfort levels while minimizing energy use. Because the DDC system collects data, it can immediately alert maintenance staff of any problems as they occur. In selected applications, payback periods range from short to moderate. Where steam radiators do not already have self-contained temperature control valves, we recommending installing them. Steam radiators can easily over-heat a space. Over heated spaces can consume a great deal of energy. Energy savings comes from providing the right amount of steam to a given area to meet the temperature needs of that area. Usually this is a short-term payback project. Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

18


Migration to new campus-wide controls infrastructure Digital real-time monitoring and automatic logging Install self-contained radiator valves Building Electrical System Improvements Potential Scope Items Explore the possibility of installing wind turbines on campus. These will not be the large turbines that inhabit wind farms in Texas nor along the mountain ridges of the northeast. Rather we would explore smaller versions that are appropriate for an urban setting. These would likely be placed on top of the taller buildings, but would not dominate the architecture. These will not play a significant role in lowering CO2 use on campus but will play their part in helping. Installing electric sub-meters does not save energy per se. However, they do reveal where electricity is being used on campus, which is difficult to accurately determine now. Which building or part of a building uses the most electricity? The answer is important in helping to focus where energy conservation measures may have the greatest affect. Also, sub-meters can quickly indicate whether and where changes in energy use occurs. Wind turbine installation Install electrical sub-meters to track building energy use Air-side HVAC Improvements Opportunity Potential Scope Items Many of the older HVAC systems across campus where designed and installed during a time when energy was inexpensive and fine control of equipment was very expensive. Constant volume air handling systems were commonly installed. They use large fan motors at a relatively constant energy rate. These systems can be converted to allow air flow to vary to meet specific space conditioning needs. DDC controls along with equipment installation can yield significant energy savings while maintaining or increasing comfort levels. Usually payback periods are short. The main kitchen on campus runs at least 12 hours per day when the students are on campus. In the kitchen are hoods that exhaust air continuously when the kitchen is occupied. While the kitchen hood exhaust is on, outside air must be drawn into the building and be conditioned to make up for the exhaust air. However, about half the time the kitchen is occupied, the kitchen hoods are operating without cooking activities. We can install systems to control exhaust air flow depending upon the cooking activities. These energy saving systems usually have short payback periods. Altschul uses large amounts of outside air to condition the building and to support the chemical fume hoods in the science classrooms and laboratories. The chemical fume hoods exhaust large amounts of air from the building. When the chemical fume hoods are not in use, air flow can be reduced in both the exhaust and outside air conditioning systems. Using DDC systems and air Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

19


flow control equipment, we can reduce energy use while maintaining a safe and comfortable environment in the science laboratories. These systems usually have a moderate payback period. The age of many of the air systems on campus is equal to the age of the buildings they serve and are at or near the end of their useful life. In some areas, the function or conditioning requirements have changed due to programming changes, increased enrollment, or student and faculty expectations. TAC will assist in strategic planning on how and when to upgrade, recondition, or replace air systems to provide lower energy use, improve space temperature control, and lower maintenance requirements. The payback period will vary depending on the extent of improvements recommended and the types of systems that are replaced. Variable Air Volume (VAV) HVAC conversion VAV control on kitchen hoods and makeup air VAV control on chemical fume hood exhaust system Air system infrastructure improvement Lighting System Improvements Opportunity Potential Scope Items In several of the dormitory corridors and in specific locations in other buildings on campus, older lighting technologies can be replaced with more energy efficient lighting. TAC will perform a campus-wide, room-by-room inventory of the lighting systems used and determine where lighting retrofits can assisting in reducing energy use while maintain or improving lighting levels. Where Retrofit T12/magnetic with T8/electronic Occupancy sensors Other lighting retrofits Heat Recovery Opportunities Opportunity Potential Scope Items The pool uses energy to heat the water. Most of the heating energy is lost through evaporation of the pool water. Pool dehumidification systems capture the wasted heat and use it to heat the pool water, provide a properly conditioned space, and can reduce property maintenance (painting walls, patching ceilings) that pools usually require. The payback periods vary depending on hours of pool use, size of pool area, and desired water temperatures. Older buildings often have many opportunities to recover waste heat. For example, toilet exhaust systems remove, by design, conditioned air from buildings. Is there a way of capturing energy from the exhaust air stream before it is wasted to the atmosphere? An affirmative answer results in significant energy savings. Mechanical rooms that are warm, computer rooms and other spaces that always need to be air conditioned are sources of heat that can be captured and re-used Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

20


to pre-heat domestic water, condition outside air, or provide heating in areas that require it. Payback periods vary and are dependent upon the precise project considered. Install pool dehumidification/HR in pool Install heat pumps in mech. rooms to preheat DHW Air-side and water-side heat recovery Food service compressor room preheat DHW Water Conservation Opportunity Potential Scope Items Often the cost of water determines the economics of water conservation projects. However, lowflow shower heads reduce hot water use. Heating water is energy intensive. Reducing the amount of water that needs to be heated for showers provides significant energy savings and short payback periods. Three buildings have domestic water booster pumps. These pumps are used to maintain building water pressure in lieu of a water tank on the roof. The pumps currently are constant volume and cycle to maintain water pressure in the buildings. Installing variable frequency drives will allow the pumps to operate at the minimum energy rate to meet the building’s water pressure needs. Energy savings and lower pump maintenance are the results. Payback periods are typically short. Replace shower heads to reduce DHW load Install VFDs on domestic water booster pumps Install low flow fixtures Building Envelope Improvements Opportunity Potential Scope Items In a number of locations, window air conditioners are used to condition rooms. Where air conditioning units are installed in double hung windows, a gap is created between the lower and upper sashes. Some installations have the gaps sealed while others do not. We will seal the gaps in the remaining windows. Savings is achieved by eliminating the free flow of outside air through the gaps into the building. Payback periods are short. In Lehman, the library has a large glass area that puts a large load on the air conditioning system in the summer. Solar film reduces the amount of infrared light (the portion of light that carries the most heat) that enters the building. Payback periods are usually short. Window replacement is usually a longer payback project from and energy savings perspective. However, if the windows in question are going to be replaced shortly, energy savings can contribute to offset a portion of the installation cost. Window seals on AC units Apply window film to control solar load Replace single pane windows with double pane Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

21


Miscellaneous Energy Projects Opportunity Potential Scope Items Cogeneration is a term meaning that one fuel is converted into two sources of energy. Typically, natural gas is burned to generate electricity and heat. The heat can be in the form of hot water or steam. Cogeneration is economical when there is a steady requirement for heat throughout the year. During the winter, the need for heat is obvious. But during the summer, the need for heat is usually low. Barnard College uses steam to heat domestic water during the summer and to generate chilled water through the absorption chillers. A balance of first cost and energy savings is required to install a successful cogeneration project. More discovery is required prior to TAC recommending this approach to energy savings. Vending machine cycling will save energy by turning off the refrigeration during low-use times, usually over night hours. Since the vending machines on campus are not owned by Barnard College, we will research this further for our next report. Thermal storage is a technique used to reduce the cost of electricity by shift when electricity is used from peak periods to off-peak periods. Alternatively, thermal storage may allow Barnard College to more fully participate in utility curtailment programs. These programs pay for the guaranteed reduction of electrical demand during peak utility demand periods. More research will be required to validate this concept for Barnard College. Cogeneration Vending Machine cycling Install thermal storage

Barnard Emissions Inventory 4/15/08

22


2005 University Emissions Inventory