“…rules and regulations are constitutive of the practices of architecture, yet little is known about their impacts on, and implications for, the design and production of the built environment.” - Robert Imrie and Emma Street
UNC Charlotte Master Plan 2010
Principles • Rules relating to building “form” and “performance” should not be an external obligation to the creative process and practice – but NECESSARY in the performance realm. •
Evidence-based codes and policies are beneficial to the overall practice of architecture, and to the benefit of the case study – University of North Carolina Charlotte.
Data Collection Tools • (Functional) Self-Reporting methods: interviews or questionnaires • (Functional) Observational Methods: elements or behaviors observed and recorded; walk-through tour • (Technical) Measurements: objectively measured data Multiple data loggers utilized to monitor indoor variant typologies such as classrooms, lecture halls, studios, offices, computer labs, etc. • (Technical) Records: analysis of metered data Historical recorded data retrieved from Facilities Management
LEED / Proposed 17%
Existing Building Stock 83%
Total Campus Analysis Campus Typologies Academic Buildings Dormitory Buildings Conclusions
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
To tal C a m p u s C onsumpti o n
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
e s a e r c In
D
ec
re as e
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
To tal C a m p u s
Energy GSF EUI
153.79
State Energy Office GSF EUI
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
146.38
Energy GSF EUI
109.52
State Energy Office GSF EUI
120.51
• Since 2002, the full time equivalent (FTE) campus population has grown by over 40%, and the built space has grown by 71%. • In that same period, energy consumption has grown by 50%, and energy costs have grown by 78%, but energy consumption per GSF has fallen by 12%
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
UNC Systemwide Campus Comparison
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
CB ECs Nati ona l 2003 Medi a n EUI
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Total Campus Benchmarking & Metrics
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Current EUI: 146 kbtu/sq Baseline EUI: 154 (NP)
(SEO) Baseline EUI: 121
30% Target Reduction from Current EUI Tren dl
ine
2003 National Median EUI
2050 Goal: Net Zero
(SEO) 30% Reduction EUI: 84
SCENARIO A UNCC’s campus “Gross Square Footage for Energy Calculations” (GSF-EC) • No parking (NP) square footage included • Baseline EUI is 154 kBtu/sf-year 2002-03 • Current EUI is 146 kBtu/sf-year 2011-12 Current EUI (year 2011-12) x 30% (year 2030) = (146.38 Kbtu/sf-yr) x (0.30) = 43.91 Kbtu/sf-yr (146.38 Kbtu/sf-yr) minus (43.91 Kbtu/sf-yr) = 102.47 Kbtu/sf-yr (2030 Challenge)
• A thirty-percent (30%) reduction by the year 2030 would result in an EUI of 103 • This reduction target would narrowingly meet CBEC’s 2003 National College/University (campus level) Median Site EUI of 104 by the year 2030 SCENARIO B UNCC’s campus “Gross Square Footage for State Energy Office” (GSF-SEO) • Parking square footage included • SEO Baseline EUI is 121 kBtu/sf-year 2002-03 • SEO Current EUI is 110 kBtu/sf-year 2011-12 Current SEO - EUI (year 2011-12) x 30% (year 2030) = (120.51 kBtu/sf-yr) x (0.30) = 36.15 kBtu/sf-yr (120.51 kBtu/sf-yr) minus (36.15 kBtu/sf-yr) = 84.36 kBtu/sf-yr (2030 Challenge)
• A thirty-percent (30%) reduction by the year 2030 would result in an EUI of 84
Energy Production for Photovoltaic Panels on Parking Deck Rooftops Parking Deck GSF: 2,792,338 Estimated Deck Rooftop: 558,546 Energy Production per Day (0.008kW) x (558,546) x 5 hours) = 22,342 kWh/day Energy Production per Year (22,342) x 365 = 8,154,771 kWh/year Total Energy Production (70% production days/year) (8,154,771) x 0.70 = 5,708,340 kWh/year
Total Energy Production: 19,476,855 kBtu/year Total Parking Energy Consumption: 9,097,536 kBtu/ year % Reduction by PV: 214.1% Notes: • Parking Deck construction and maintenance are not funded by the State • Energy produced by PV’s on rooftop’s of parking decks, would provide enough electricity for all parking decks and one of the following buildings: • Center City, Duke Centennial
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Energy Consumption Distribution by Campus Typology
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
2 0 0 2 -0 3 BA S E L I NE Y EA R E L EC T R I C 2 0 0 2 -0 3 BA S E L I NE Y EA R NAT U R A L G A S 2 0 1 1 -1 2 Y EA R E L EC T R I C 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 Y EA R NAT U R A L G A S
ACADEMIC
ADMIN
ASSEMBLY
AUXILARY
DORM
ELEC: + 1% NG: + 79%
ELEC: 1% NG: + 62%
ELEC: + 91% NG: 5%
ELEC: 35% NG: + 12%
FOOD
HEALTH
PARKING
2002-03 Baseline Year
2011-12
%
ELEC: + 64% NG: + 78%
ELEC: + 39% NG: + 51%
ELEC: + 95% NG: 141%
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Energy Utilization Intensity (EUI) by Campus Typology
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
2003 CBEC’s MEDIAN
78
86
100
N/A
95
230
135
N/A
BASELINE UNCC 02-03 MEDIAN
62
75
84
67
64
245
0
0
2011-12 MEDIAN
62
74
104
119
45
206
118
5
AVERAGE
145
104
101
2,787
49
273
118
4
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Energy Utilization Intensity (EUI) by Campus Typology
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
2 0 0 2 -0 3 BA S E L I NE Y EA R E L EC T R I C 2 0 0 2 -0 3 BA S E L I NE Y EA R NAT U R A L G A S 2 0 1 1 -1 2 Y EA R E L EC T R I C 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 Y EA R NAT U R A L G A S
2,489
CB ECs CL I M AT E 4 - M E DI A N
5220
229.78
134.58
77.77
86.31
100.15
95.27
N/A
ACADEMIC
ADMIN
ASSEMBLY
AUXILARY
N/A
DORM
FOOD
HEALTH
PARKING
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
ACADEMIC
ADMIN
ASSEMBLY
AUXILARY
DORM
FOOD
HEALTH
PARKING
• All Academic Buildings Energy Consumption • EUI by Vintage • RED Flag Buildings • Smith, Storrs, Bioinformatics Analysis • Three Buildings Comparison
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Energy Consumption Distribution by ACADEMIC Typology
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
1,098
11-12 UNCC AVERAGE (145)
Increase + 47.8% 9 years
11-12 UNCC AVERAGE (88) w/o Kennedy ‘03 CBECS MEDIAN (78)
‘7 9
‘8 1
‘8 5
‘9 0
‘9 6
‘0 5
‘0 5
DUKE CENT.
‘9 1
‘0 5
CENTER CITY
‘7 5
V I NTAG E 2
BIOINFORMATICS
‘71
WOODWARD
‘66
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
STORRS
BURSON
FRIDAY
COLVARD
MCENIRY
ROWE
SMITH
DENNY COMPLEX ‘65
FRETWELL
‘61
V I NTAG E 1
CAMERON ARC
‘6 1
MACY
KENNEDY
UNCC MEDIAN (62)
‘0 9
‘1 1
EPIC
02-03 UNCC AVERAGE (76)
V I NTAG E 3 ‘1 1
2002- 03 BAS EL I NE YEAR EL EC T R I C 2002- 03 BAS EL I NE YEAR NATU R A L G A S 2011- 12 YEAR EL EC TR I C 2011 - 12 YEAR NATUR AL GAS
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
2011-12 EUI by Vintage
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Note: Omitted Kennedy for clarity in Vintage A (included, elec. EUI: 164)
+ 22% 2002-03
- 26%
RE
DU
CT
IO
N
IN
EL
EC T
RIC
ITY + 34%
S A LG
I SE
A E CR
IN
A R U T A N N
+ 50%
- 43%
-7%
2002-03
Elect ric = 7 9 Nat ural Gas = 1 3 (avg . EUI = 9 2 )
El ect ri c = 59 Nat u ra l Ga s = 26 ( avg . EUI = 85)
E l ec t r i c = 3 3 Nat u ra l G a s = 4 0 (avg. E U I = 7 3 )
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
EUI 1098.59
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
EUI 486.28
EUI 89.89
RED FLAG Buildings
KENNEDY • Electric consumption increase over 12 times the baseline year • All years have higher OTHER RED FLAG Academic than CBECs data in ‘03 2002-03 EUI: 75.73 2011-12 EUI: 145.04
EUI 95.68
EUI 199.76
EUI 35.36
Newer Academic Buildings: • Woodward Hall total EUI is 129.22 • Center City Building total EUI is 128.33
COLVARD • Except for baseline year, all EUI’s are higher than CBECs data in ‘03 Older Academic Buildings: • McEniry has highest • Varying kBTU totals, from water consumption of lower than average to 9,627,616 CF higher
EUI 217.96
EUI 87.61
EUI 62.29
• McEniry higher than average EUI, 101.36 • Storrs electric consumption increased over 4 times
CAMERON • Progressive increase in electricity energy consumption over 8 times the baseline year • Except for baseline year, all EUI’s are higher than CBECs data in ‘03
NOTE: Academic CBEC’s Median EUI is 78
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
1966
SMITH BUILDING
1990
STORRS BUILDING
2009
BIOINFORMATICS BUILDING
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
SMITH Engineering Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
QUICK FACTS Year Completed: 1966 Construction Cost: $1.6 million Department: Engineering Tech. Construction Management Building Code: 0012 Building Liason: Daniel Rowe
OCCUPANCY
BUILDING DETAILS
Program Variant Typologies: Classrooms, Laboratories, Offices
Gross Floor Area: 91,539 Number of Stories: 3 Envelope Cladding: Precast Concrete
Classroom Average Hours in Use: 66% Assigned Square Footage: 60,025 Building Shape: Square / Rectangle Orientation: North - South Number of PCs: 375 % Glazing (WWR): 26-50% Weekly Operating Hours: 168 Occupants on Main Shift: 675 Roof Shape: Flat Faculty: 125 Staff: 50 Students: 500 Roof Material: Built - Up
HVAC SYSTEM Fuel Type: Natural Gas Equip Heat: District Heat Equip Cool: Terminal:
Chiller/Cooling Tower Ducted air to registers
DHW Fuel Source: District Steam DHW Equip: Central Heater
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
SMITH Engineering Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Green Globe Suggestions Reduce Energy Consumption by 20% 30% Reduction Target (from 2011-12)
ENERGY
Site EUI 24 kBTU/ sq.ft.
INCREASE 57%
Site EUI 56 kBTU/ sq.ft.
Median
Design
Target
Energy Performance Rating (0-100)
50
90
100
Energy Reduction (%)
0
45
70
Source Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year)
333
184
99
Site Energy Use (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year)
102
56
30
Total Annual Source Energy (kBtu)
30,442,585
16,798,112
9,069,320
Total Annual Site Energy (kBtu)
9,361,887
5,165,857
2,789,052
Total Annual Energy Cost ($)
$206,276
$84,563
$61,453
1,365
753
407
0%
45%
70%
POLLUTION EMISSIONS CO2-eq Emissions (metric tons/year) CO2-eq Emissions Reduction (%)
WATER PROFILE
Annual Water Usage 57,745 cubic feet
ELECTRIC ENERGY PROFILE
96%
Annual Electricity 1,455,761 kW
NATURAL GAS ENERGY PROFILE
4%
Annual Natural Gas 1,988 therms
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
SMITH Engineering Building “Restrooms need renovation. Air flow is poor, water flow is bad. Water fountains need to be replaced.”
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
22 Faculty/Staff Responses
“HVAC rennovations seems to have made things worse.” “Gut to structure, remediate asbestos and refurbish classrooms with appropriate seating, sight lines and acoustical treatments. It may be less expensive to just demolish the building.” “Room 202 is so poorly designed it is unusable. Recent work has been all facade and no functionality. Office furniture is of low quality and compromises the reputation of the University (based on student comments).” “The building is old and needs updating. The floors need to be replaced with modern flooring. The stairwells are dirty and needs updating with new flooring in them. Also, the trees outside between Smith and the Prospector need to be cut down. They are too big and they drop pine needles and pine cones all the time. If fact, it is dangerous when it is wet and rainy because the needles and cones are slippery when wet and the cones are unsafe if you happen to step on one.” “The bathrooms really need to be up-dated. They are in poor condition and no amount of cleaning will make them better” “Buidling needs total renovation especially the bathrooms.” “Entrance of building needs to be enhanced both exterior and interior. Over grown trees, and landscaping need to be replaced. Interior entrance needs transformation, lighting, flooring, and relocation of recycle containers and trash containers.” “Building could use some cosmetic touch-ups/ major facelift - it is over 50 years old and time for some work.”
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
SMITH Engineering Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
“classrooms we use (267,269, 272) have very poor to no air circulation and heating/cooling ineffective. My personal office space not so much of a problem, it is the classrooms that cause the most heartburn with respect to an effective teaching environment. Also, need additional dedicated storage space for our classroom equipment, apparatus and supplies since we teach in three separate classrooms at various times and days, and the rooms are not secure, we need better storage space.�
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
SMITH Engineering Building GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT Energy 61% Water 51% Resources 68% Emissions 85% Indoor Environment 62% EMS Documentation 39% Overall Rating 62% Energy Consumption • Smith achieved a score of 80% for its energy consumption, based on the entered individual building rating of 90 from the EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manager, “Office” typology • Energy performance was 53.61 kBtu/Sq.Ft./ yr. GHG emissions (CO2 equivalent) were 1,134.67 tons/yr. Smith’s Energy Efficiency Features • Smith achieved a score of 53% based on a review of individual features of the building fabric and services • Energy efficient lighting that includes: • compact fluorescents • T8 or T5 fluorescents • light emitting diodes (LEDs) on exit signs • high intensity discharge lamps • task lighting • High efficiency lighting accounts for 1 - 49% of the building’s lighting. • The building has high efficiency boilers. • High efficiency boilers account for 50-100% of the boilers.
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Recommendations
Energy Management Features • Smith achieved a score of 36% for energy management. A comprehensive program can contribute significant savings to the bottom line. • Major energy uses of the building are being monitored. • There is an operating manual covering standard control settings, operating instructions and basic trouble-shooting for all services equipment that may affect the building’s energy consumption. • There is a regular maintenance schedule of mechanical systems and building envelope that includes: • checks on the correct operation of ventilation and cooling controls • checking of temperature, humidity and fresh air controls to ensure they are set correctly and are responding as • intended • checking of air-supply grilles to ensure they are not blocked and are delivering fresh air as required • checks for refrigerant leaks • checks on air-handling units and cooling towers • replacement of filters • cleaning and sterilizing of wet regions in the air conditioning system and checking for accumulation of dirt
Lighting • Install daylight sensors, or occupancy sensors in areas such as stairwells and storage rooms. Controls • Smith may benefit from installing a full or partial building automation system (BAS) that would automatically manage its heating/cooling, ventilation, air quality, lighting and security systems. Hot Water • Consider either condensing water heaters for storage of large quantities of water or tankless (instantaneous) hot water heaters for where the demand for hot water is occasional rather than continuous, and the volume required is relatively low. Solar water heating can also be effective where there is good solar access. • Maintain hot water between 105° and 120° F Other • Consider variable speed drives on fans and pumps • A cogeneration system • An energy recovery ventilation system • Investigate the possibility of purchasing “green energy”. • Evaluate the potential of harnessing a renewable energy on site. • Ground-source heat pumps (GSHP) can reduce the energy required for space heating, cooling and service water heating in commercial/institutional buildings by as much as 50%. Envelope Management Recommendations • Consider doing a performance and condition • Perform a detailed energy audit and prepare an assessment of the building envelope in terms of energy management (reduction) plan. water infiltration condensation, moist air trans• Set realistic goals and targets - monitor monthly fer, air flow and heat transfer. Evaluate the mainusage and peak demand in 15 or 30 minute intenance and life cycle cost of all building and crements and hourly energy demand for a typiroof materials. Thermal imaging equipment may cal weekday and weekend day for each of the be used to complete the assessment. four seasons. Investigate measures to flatten the load profile • Provide energy metering for each major tenant.
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
SMITH Engineering Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT Energy 61% Water 51% Resources 68% Emissions 85% Indoor Environment 62% EMS Documentation 39% Overall Rating 62%
Water Consumption • Smith achieved 51% for installing waterconserving features and implementing water-management best practices. • The water consumption of Smith is less than 0.5 m³/m²/year. Water Conserving Features • The building uses the following water-conserving fixtures: • Automatic valve controls and/or proximity detectors • The cooling systems avoid once-through water. • Regular water monitoring is conducted
Recommendations Consider installing: • Low flush (less than 1.6 GPF) toilets as per the EPACT of 1992 can reduce consumption by as much as $75 USD/ toilet/yr. At an estimated replacement cost of less than $180/ toilet, the simple payback is less than 3 years. • low flush urinals that use less than 1.0 GPF • Consider using collected rainwater for • Consider the feasibility of using “grey water” for irrigation in the event of a major retrofit. irrigation. Management Recommendations Consider: • a written water conservation policy that is intended to minimize water use and encourage water conservation. • Establish water-reduction targets in terms of gallons/person or gallons/SF. • Establish procedures to check for and fix leaks in the building’s plumbing system.
FINANCES 2011-12 Costs: $84,563.12 2 Energy Cost: $0.92 / ft / year If all energy savings measures listed from Green Globes suggestions were implemented, the annual saving potential could be in 2 the order of $16,500; or total $0.74/ft /year. A 30% reduction target would be $0.65/ft2/year.
Energy Reduction Targets
• Green Globes suggestions would reduce consumption by 20%
• High-efficiency windows and doors would reduce overall heating and cooling by 20%
• If a Ground Source Heat Pump was installed at Smith, it would reduce Water Heating from 516,586 to 258,293 kBtu/ year Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
QUICK FACTS Year Completed: 1990 Construction Cost: $3.66 million Department: Architecture Building Code: 0041 Architect: Gwathmey-Siegel/FWA Building Liason: Rich Preiss OCCUPANCY
BUILDING DETAILS
Program Variant Typologies:
Gross Floor Area: 105,050 Number of Stories: 2 Envelope Cladding: CMU
Classrooms, Lecture Halls, Studio Spaces, Offices, Wood Shop, Daylighting Lab, Computer Labs
Classroom Average Hours in Use: 74% Assigned Square Footage: 59,894 Number of PCs: 275 Weekly Operating Hours: 168 Occupants on Main Shift: 450 Faculty: 40 Staff: 10 Students: 400
HVAC SYSTEM Fuel Type: Natural Gas Equip Heat: District Heat Equip Cool:
Chiller/Cooling Tower
Building Shape: Rectangle Orientation: North - South Terminal: Ducted air to registers % Glazing (WWR): 51-75% Structural System: Steel Frame DHW Fuel Source: Electric Roof Shape: Flat, Skylights DHW Equip: Central Heater Roof Material: Built - Up
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Green Globe Suggestions Reduce Energy Consumption by 25% 30% Reduction Target (from 2011-12)
ENERGY
Median
Design
Target
Energy Performance Rating (0-100)
50
62
78
Energy Reduction (%)
0
13
30
296
258
207
Site Energy Use (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year)
89
77
62
Total Annual Source Energy (kBtu)
31,123,052
27,110,536
21,786,136
Total Annual Site Energy (kBtu)
9,321,747
8,119,948
6,525,223
Total Annual Energy Cost ($)
$145,598
$126,827
$101,919
1,393
1,214
975
0%
13%
30%
Source Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year)
Site EUI 17 kBTU/ sq.ft.
INCREASE 78%
WATER PROFILE
Annual Water Usage 182,752 cubic feet
Site EUI 77 kBTU/ sq.ft. ELECTRIC ENERGY PROFILE
POLLUTION EMISSIONS CO2-eq Emissions (metric tons/year) CO2-eq Emissions Reduction (%)
99%
Annual Electricity 2,378,531 kWh
NATURAL GAS ENERGY PROFILE
1%
Annual Natural Gas 44 therms
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building “I joke that the building was designed to emulate the climate zones of the world and you can find a space that represents any given climate zone throughout the day. It is honestly the worst building I have ever experienced in terms of thermal comfort.”
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
16 Faculty/Staff Responses 36 Student Responses
“Restrooms are under ventilated. Salon is way under illuminated. Carpeted areas are gross. Rear work yard requires new surfacing and better drainage. Highly utilized rear entry needs separation from trash containers. Longstanding visible evidence of moisture penetration suggests building neglect.” “Reminiscent of a Sauna in the warmer months, and overly heated in the cool months.”
“Someone is randomly setting the temperature from the other side of the world because they have no idea how the outdoors feel compared to Storrs. When its cool outside, its blazing in here. When its pleasent outside, its a hotbox or a freezer in here. FIX IT PLEASE”
“Storrs should be an example of thermal comfort and sustainable techniques. This includes more efficient heating and cooling. More passive methods of obtaining thermal comfort. Recycling and reducing waster should be addressed. Water bottle refill stations should be installed on the water fountains, as well as a better material recycling effort. The amount of waste that ends up in the trash cans is inexcusable. A better effort in the studio environment to reduce, reuse, and recycle, should be part of our studio culture.” “The heating/cooling system is EXTREMELY off. We freeze all day and cannot get work done. We use blankets and space heaters year round.”
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
“The lighting is fine in the offices. The lighting is very inadequate in what we call the crit rooms which are teaching spaces.” “The crit rooms are very poorly lit/ painted. We need brighter spaces to facilitate a more creative/inspirational atmosphere.” Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Mold & Mildew growth; dust mites, bacteria, and fungi
COMFORT ZONE Eye irritation or stuffy nose; allergies & easy spread of viruses
COMFORT ZONE
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Mold & Mildew growth; dust mites, bacteria, and fungi
COMFORT ZONE Eye irritation or stuffy nose; allergies & easy spread of viruses
COMFORT ZONE
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT Energy 29% Water 38% Resources 68%
Recommendations
Energy Management Features • Storrs achieved a score of 11% for energy management. A comprehensive program can contribute significant savings to the bottom line. • Major energy uses of the building are being monitored. • There is an operating manual covering standard control settings, operating instructions and basic trouble-shooting for all services equipment that may affect the building’s energy consumption. • There is a regular maintenance schedule of mechanical systems and building envelope that includes: • checks on air-handling units and cooling towers • replacement of filters • cleaning and sterilizing of wet regions in the air conditioning system and checking for accumulation of dirt
Lighting • Install daylight sensors, or occupancy sensors in Emissions 89% areas such as stairwells and storage rooms. Boilers Indoor Environment 52% • Install high-efficiency boilers & automatic vent dampers EMS Documentation 42% Controls • Storrs may benefit from installing a full or parOverall Rating 49% tial building automation system (BAS) that would automatically manage its heating/cooling, ventilation, air quality, lighting and security systems. Energy Consumption • Consider implementing temperature setback • Storrs achieved a score of 0% for its energy i.e. adjusting the building temperature when it is consumption, based on the entered indiunoccupied to minimize heating or cooling revidual building rating of 62 from the EPA Enquirements. ergy Star Portfolio Manager, “Office” typol- Hot Water ogy • Consider either condensing water heaters for • Energy performance was 77.29 kBtu/Sq.Ft./ storage of large quantities of water or tankless yr. GHG emissions (CO2 equivalent) were (instantaneous) hot water heaters for where the 1,784.76 tons/yr. demand for hot water is occasional rather than Management Recommendations continuous, and the volume required is relative• Perform a detailed energy audit and prepare an Storrs Energy Efficiency Features ly low. Solar water heating can also be effective energy management (reduction) plan. • Storrs achieved a score of 32% based on a where there is good solar access. • Set realistic goals and targets - monitor monthly review of individual features of the building • Maintain hot water between 105° and 120° F usage and peak demand in 15 or 30 minute infabric and services Other crements and hourly energy demand for a typi• Energy efficient lighting that includes: • Consider variable speed drives on fans and cal weekday and weekend day for each of the • compact fluorescents pumps four seasons. Investigate measures to flatten the • T8 or T5 fluorescents • A cogeneration system load profile • light emitting diodes (LEDs) on exit signs • An energy recovery ventilation system • Provide energy metering for each major tenant. • high intensity discharge lamps • Investigate the possibility of purchasing “green The building should have sub-meters for moni• task lighting energy”. toring major energy uses to establish building • High efficiency lighting accounts for 1 - 49% of • Evaluate the potential of harnessing a renewable load profile and demand structure. the building’s lighting. energy on site. • Provide an easy-to-follow manual that lists all • High efficiency chillers account for 50-100% of • Ground-source heat pumps (GSHP) can reduce the services contained within the building, with the chillers the energy required for space heating, cooling a description of function, operating instruc• The building uses variable speed drives and service water heating in commercial/institutions, standard control settings and basic troutional buildings by as much as 50%. ble-shooting.
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
STORRS Architecture Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT Energy 29%
Recommendations
Water 38%
Consider installing: • Low flush (less than 1.6 GPF) toilets as per the EPACT of 1992 can reduce consumption by as much as $75 USD/ toilet/yr. At an estimated replacement cost of less than $180/ toilet, the simple payback is less than 3 years. • low flush urinals that use less than 1.0 GPF • automatic valve controls and/or proximity detectors • Consider using collected rainwater for irrigation • Consider the feasibility of using “grey water” for irrigation in the event of a major retrofit. irrigation.
Resources 68% Emissions 89% Indoor Environment 52% EMS Documentation 42% Overall Rating 49%
Water Consumption • Storrs achieved 38% for installing waterconserving features and implementing water-management best practices. • The water consumption of Storrs is less than 1.0 m³/m²/year. Water Conserving Features • The building uses the following water-conserving fixtures: • The cooling systems avoid once-through water. • Regular water monitoring is conducted
Management Recommendations Consider: • a written water conservation policy that is intended to minimize water use and encourage water conservation.
FINANCES 2011-12 Costs: $141,291.49 2 Energy Cost: $1.34 / ft / year If all energy savings measures listed from Green Globes suggestions were implemented, the annual saving potential could be in the order of $35,400; or total $1.01/ft2/year. A 2 30% reduction target would be $0.94/ft /year.
Energy Reduction Targets
• Green Globes suggestions would reduce consumption by 25%
• High-efficiency windows and doors would reduce overall heating and cooling by 20% • Proper air sealing of building reduce en• If a Ground Source Heat Pump was installed at Storrs, it would reduce Water Heating from 811,994 to 405,997 kBtu/ year
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
BIOINFORMATICS Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
QUICK FACTS Year Completed: 2009 Construction Cost: $35 million Department: Bioinformatics & Genomics Building Code: 0068 Architect: LS3P Associates LTD Building Liason: Patricia Artis
OCCUPANCY
BUILDING DETAILS
Program Variant Typologies:
Gross Floor Area: 97,066 Number of Stories: 4 Envelope Cladding: Brick
Classrooms, Auditorium, wet labs, proteomics lab, conference rooms, offices, computer labs
Classroom Average Hours in Use: 74% Assigned Square Footage: 59,894 Number of PCs: 275 Weekly Operating Hours: 168 Occupants on Main Shift: 450 Faculty: 40 Staff: 10 Students: 400
HVAC SYSTEM Fuel Type: Natural Gas Equip Heat: District Heat Equip Cool:
Chiller/Cooling Tower
Building Shape: Square Orientation: SW - NE Terminal: Ducted air to registers % Glazing (WWR): 26-50% Structural System: Steel Frame DHW Fuel Source: District HW Roof Shape: Hipped, Flat DHW Equip: Central Heater Roof Material: Asphalt/ built - up
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
BIOINFORMATICS Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
ENERGY
Median
Design
Target
Energy Performance Rating (0-100)
50
94
100
Energy Reduction (%)
0
52
70
223
108
67
Site Energy Use (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year)
83
40
25
Total Annual Source Energy (kBtu)
21,668,493
10,446,997
6,455,381
Total Annual Site Energy (kBtu)
8,078,552
3,894,900
2,406,726
Total Annual Energy Cost ($)
$156,289
$75,351
$46,561
CO2-eq Emissions (metric tons/year)
985
475
293
CO2-eq Emissions Reduction (%)
0%
52%
70%
Source Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year)
Site EUI 16 kBTU/ sq.ft.
INCREASE 60%
WATER PROFILE
Annual Water Usage 82,787 cubic feet
Site EUI 40 kBTU/ sq.ft. ELECTRIC ENERGY PROFILE
POLLUTION EMISSIONS
71%
Annual Electricity 814,068 kWh
NATURAL GAS ENERGY PROFILE
29%
Annual Natural Gas 11,173 therms
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
BIOINFORMATICS Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT Energy 76% Water 66%
• The building heats its water using high-efficien- Energy Management Features cy technology • Bioinformatics achieved a score of 39% for Resources 68% • The building has hot-water saving devices. energy management. • There are energy-efficient windows. • Major energy uses of the building are being Emissions 88% • The upper third of the building and the mechanmonitored. ical penthouse have been sealed. • There is an operating manual covering standard Indoor Environment 83% • The lower third of the building, the entrance control settings, operating instructions and badoors and the parking area have been sealed. sic trouble-shooting for all services equipment EMS Documentation 56% • Vertical shafts have been sealed. that may affect the building’s energy consump• The insulation of the walls complies with the tion. Overall Rating 76% recommendation of the building condition re• There is a regular maintenance schedule of meport. chanical systems and building envelope that in• The insulation of the roof complies with the reccludes: Energy Consumption ommendation of the building condition report. • measurement of boiler efficiency • Bioinformatics achieved a score of 100% for • checks on the correct operation of ventilaits energy consumption, based on the enRecommendations tion and cooling controls tered individual building rating of 94 from Other Energy Efficiency Features • checking of temperature, humidity and fresh the EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manager, “OfConsider installing some of the following enair controls to ensure they are set correctly fice” typology ergy-efficiency features: and are responding as intended • Energy performance was 40.42 kBtu/Sq.Ft./ • cogeneration, which captures and recycles re• checking of air-supply grilles to ensure they yr. GHG emissions (CO2 equivalent) were jected heat that would otherwise escape from are not blocked and are delivering fresh air 851.38 tons/yr. existing electricity generation in the building. as required • an energy recovery ventilation system which re• checks for refrigerant leaks Bioinformatics Energy Efficiency Features claims waste energy from exhaust air and uses • checks on air-handling units and cooling • Bioinformatics achieved a score of 32% that heat to condition the incoming fresh air. towers based on a review of individual features of • explore the possibility of other energy-saving • replacement of filters the building fabric and services systems, measures or technologies and indicate • cleaning and sterilizing of wet regions in the • Energy efficient lighting that includes: how these would be integrated into the building air conditioning system and checking for ac• compact fluorescents Green Energy cumulation of dirt • T8 or T5 fluorescents • Investigate the possibility of purchasing “green • light emitting diodes (LEDs) on exit signs energy”. Management Recommendations • high intensity discharge lamps • Evaluate the potential of harnessing a renewable • Set realistic goals and targets monitor monthly • task lighting energy source on site. usage and peak demand in 15 or 30 minute in• High efficiency lighting accounts for 75-100% of Envelope crements and hourly energy demand for a typithe building • Consider doing a performance and condition cal weekday and weekend day for each of the • High efficiency chillers account for 50-100% of assessment of the building envelope in terms of four seasons. Investigate measures to flatten the the chillers water infiltration condensation, moist air transload profile • The building uses variable speed drives fer, air flow and heat transfer. Evaluate the main• Provide energy metering for each major tenant. • There are vent dampers to restrict the loss of tenance and life cycle cost of all building and The building should have sub-meters for moniheat up the chimney roof materials. Thermal imaging equipment may toring major energy uses to establish building • Temperature setback and weather compensation be used to complete the assessment. load profile and demand structure. are implemented. Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
BIOINFORMATICS Building
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT Energy 76% Water 66% Resources 68% Emissions 88% Indoor Environment 83%
Recommendations Consider: • Consider using collected rainwater for irrigation • Consider the feasibility of using “grey water” for irrigation in the event of a major retrofit. irrigation.
EMS Documentation 56%
Management Recommendations Overall Rating 76% Consider: • a written water conservation policy that is intended to minimize water use and encourage water conservation. Water Consumption • Establish water-reduction targets in • Bioinformatics achieved 66% for terms of gallons/person or gallons/SF. installing water-conserving fea• Establish procedures to check for and tures and implementing waterfix leaks in the building’s plumbing management best practices. system. • The water consumption is less than 0.5 m³/m²/year. Water Conserving Features • The building uses the following water-conserving features: • The cooling systems avoid oncethrough water. • low flow toilets that use less than 1.6 Gal/flush • low flush urinals that use less than 1.0 Gal/flush • automatic valve controls and/or proximity detectors • The cooling systems avoid oncethrough water.
FINANCES 2011-12 Costs: $47,314 2 Energy Cost: $0.48 / ft / year If all energy savings measures listed from Green Globes suggestions were implemented, the annual saving potential could be in the order of $3,600; or total $0.45/ft2/year. A 30% reduction target would be $0.34/ft2/year.
Energy Reduction Targets
• Green Globes suggestions would reduce consumption by 8%
• If a Ground Source Heat Pump was installed at Bioinformatics, it would reduce Water Heating from 389,490 to 194,745 kBtu/year
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Academic Comparison
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
‘03 CBECs MEDIAN (78)
BASELINE YEAR
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Academic Comparison
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
1990
1966
Y
2009
SMITH BUILDING GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT
STORRS BUILDING GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT
BIOINFORMATICS BUILDING GREEN GLOBES BUILDING REPORT
Energy 61% Water 51%
Energy 29%
Energy 76%
Water 38%
Water 66%
Resources 68%
Resources 68%
Resources 68%
Emissions 85%
Emissions 89%
Emissions 88%
Indoor Environment 62%
Indoor Environment 52%
Indoor Environment 83%
EMS Documentation 39%
EMS Documentation 42%
EMS Documentation 56%
Overall Rating 62%
Overall Rating 49%
Overall Rating 76%
ENERGY
Median
Median Design ENERGYDesign Target ENERGY Target
Median
Median Design ENERGYDesign Target ENERGY
Target
Median
Median Design
Des T
Energy Performance Rating (0-100) Performance Rating (0-100)
50
5090Energy Performance 90 100 Energy Performance 100(0-100) Rating (0-100) Rating
50
5062 62 Energy 78 Performance 78(0-100) Rating (0-100) Energy Performance Rating
50
5094
9
Energy Reduction (%) Reduction (%)
0
0 45Energy Reduction 45 Energy 70 (%) Reduction 70 (%)
0
0 13 13 Energy 30 (%) Reduction 30 (%) Energy Reduction
0
0 52
5
223 108
10
8340
4
Source Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) 333
333 184 184 Source 99Use Intensity Energy 99Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Source Energy (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) 296
Site (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Energy Use (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) ergy Use
10256Site Energy56 Site 30 (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Energy Use 30 (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Use
102
89
296 258 258 Source 207 Energy 207 Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Source Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) 223 8977 Site 62 (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Energy Use 62 (kBtu/Sq.Ft./Year) Site Energy77 Use
Annual Source Energy (kBtu) nnual Total Source Energy (kBtu)
16,798,112 16,798,112 9,069,320 Total Annual 9,069,320 Source Energy (kBtu) 30,442,585 30,442,585 Total Annual Source Energy (kBtu)
Annual (kBtu) Site Energy (kBtu) nnual Total Site Energy
9,361,887
9,361,887 5,165,857 5,165,857 2,789,052 Total Annual 2,789,052 Site Energy (kBtu) Total Annual Site Energy (kBtu)
9,321,747
9,321,747 8,119,948 8,119,948 6,525,223 Total Annual 6,525,223 Site Energy (kBtu) Total Annual Site Energy (kBtu)
8,078,552
8,078,552 3,894,900
Annual Cost ($) nnual Total Energy Cost Energy ($)
$206,276
$206,276 $84,563 $84,563 $61,453 Total Annual $61,453 Energy Cost ($) Total Annual Energy Cost ($)
$145,598
$145,598 $126,827 $126,827 $101,919 Total Annual $101,919 Energy Cost ($) Total Annual Energy Cost ($)
$156,289
$156,289 $75,351
985
985 475
47
0%
0% 52%
52
TIONPOLLUTION EMISSIONSEMISSIONS CO2-eq Emissions (metric tons/year) Emissions (metric tons/year) Emissions Reduction (%) CO2-eq Emissions Reduction (%)
27,110,536 27,110,536 21,786,136 Total Annual 21,786,136 Source Energy (kBtu) 31,123,052 31,123,052 Total Annual Source Energy (kBtu)
83
POLLUTIONPOLLUTION EMISSIONSEMISSIONS 1,365 0%
1,365 753 753 407 407 CO2-eq Emissions (metric tons/year) CO2-eq Emissions (metric tons/year) 0% 45% 45% 70% 70% (%) CO2-eq Emissions Reduction CO2-eq Emissions Reduction (%)
10,446,997 10,44 6,4 21,668,493 21,668,493
3,894 2,4
$75 $4
POLLUTIONPOLLUTION EMISSIONSEMISSIONS 1,393 0%
1,393 1,214 1,214 975 (metric 975 CO2-eq Emissions (metric tons/year) CO2-eq Emissions tons/year) 0% 13% 13% 30% 30%(%) CO2-eq Emissions Reduction CO2-eq Emissions Reduction (%)
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
ACADEMIC
ADMIN
ASSEMBLY
AUXILARY
DORM
FOOD
HEALTH
PARKING
• All Dormitory Buildings Energy Consumption • EUI by Vintage • Sanford, Poplar and Miltmore Dorm Analysis
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Energy Utilization Index by DORM Typology
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
2 0 0 2 -0 3 BA S E L I NE Y EA R E L EC T R I C 2 0 0 2 -0 3 BA S E L I NE Y EA R NAT U R A L G A S 264
2 0 1 1 -1 2 Y EA R E L EC T R I C 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 Y EA R NAT U R A L G A S
‘03 CBECS MEDIAN (95) 02-03 UNCC AVERAGE (90)
Decrease - 45.6 % 9 years 11-12 UNCC AVERAGE (49) 11-12 UNCC MEDIAN (45)
EUI
MOORE 57
SANFORD 49
SCOTT 67
HOLSHOUSER 68
C, H, S 31
HAWTHORN 39
OAK 31
E, M, P 5
POPLAR 14
WALLIS 59
LYNCH 60
MILTMORE 42
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
2011-12 EUI by Vintage
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
RED
UCT
ION
IN E
LEC
S A G L A R U T A N N I E S A E R C N I
TRI
CITY
Note: Not enough data to support analysis for Vintage B generation Greek Village (14 bldg.’s)
Elect ric = 2 9 Nat ural Gas = 21 (avg . EUI = 5 0)
E l ec t r i c = 1 8 Nat u ra l G a s = 2 4 (avg. E U I = 4 2 )
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
2011-12 EUI THREE Dorm Buildings
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
‘03 CBECS AVERAGE (95)
BASELINE YEAR
SANFORD
POPLAR
MILTMORE
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Housing Survey
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
“The lounges need better control or accessible controls to the thermostat so the rooms can be adjusted, the windows need to be sealed better,” “THERE IS NO REASON AS TO WHY THERE IS NO SOAP IN ANY OF THE BATHROOMS IN THE HIGHRISE” “As far as everything else besides the water and heat the building is fine. Maybe some real soap!” “The upper floors have really hot rooms, or just cold water.” “...the lights in the common rooms will not turn off when residents want to watch movies in the larger rooms in the building.” “Holshouser is too hot.” “I would like access to our thermostat in the living room” “The actual building is fine. The upper floor rooms seem to get warm easily” “ovens do not work efficiently” “Bathroom mold”
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Housing Survey
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Conclusions on Energy & Sustainability Mentionables
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
“explore”
“strive” “should”
...add “surrounding community”
“goal” needs to change to “POLICY” for LEED standards
4 Sustainable Categories: 1. Ecology & Hydrology 2. Energy 3. Built Environments 4. Public Education (needs further explanation within an acutal POLICY or INITIATIVE)
“ ...pursue gbc certification on a project-by-project basis ”
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions
Conclusions
Large windows in education facilities provide natural light and outdoor views – qualities associated with better performance: Students in daylit classrooms have shown up to a 21 percent improvement in test scores (Heschong-Mahone Group 2003).
High-Performance Policies in Large Building Stock Portfolios: a Methodology for Assessing Repurpose-Ability at UNC Charlotte
• Develop specific Action Plans and corresponding teams for the following areas: University metered data seems erroneous in some areas, which could be a result of faulty equipment and meter errors. Funding should be appropriated to technical equipment for continuous measurement as a method for maintaining good indoor air quality. The sustainability-related policies on campus vary from transportation issues and shuttle networks, to bike programs and tree planting initiatives, but for the most part omit the built environment. Clemson and Appalachian are examples of universities that are ‘culture-oriented’, whereas UNCC is viewed by many as ‘process-oriented’.
• Building Energy Efficiency – New and Existing Capital Projects • Carbon-free Energy Sources and Offsets • Resource Management and Waste Elimination • Transportation Energy Efficiency • Culture and Leadership – Outreach • Education and Research – Communications • Move toward an “outcome-based” mentality for the built environment on campus, in order to “be seen both as a model and as a resource to assist the community” in addressing sustainability issues. • A “real-time” energy management or “dashboard” system should be implemented for each building on campus – web-based monitoring would be the least expensive. Pulse Energy example. • Examine the possible implementation of commonly used technologies used in existing Net Zero buildings across the nation; more than 85% incorporate daylighting. Further investigate the following and run analyses for all buildings on campus: 1. Heat gain and heat loss through walls, roof/ceilings, doors, floors, windows, and skylights. 2. Solar gain from windows, skylights, and opaque surfaces. 3. Heat storage effects of different types of thermal mass 4. Building operating schedules for people, lighting, equipment and ventilation. 5. Space conditioning system operation including equipment part load performance.
Total Campus Campus Typologies Academic Dormitory Conclusions