Smart Energy Assistance Center_savings by liuqingyan


									WMRC Sustainability Seminar

    Sustainability, Energy, and the
        Energy/Water Nexus

                                  Donald Fournier
                       Building Research Council
                                   School of Architecture
            University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
   Background (US and
    World Energy
   Sustainability and the
    tech fix.
   Can we get there?
   The Energy Water/
Source: DOE/EIA International Energy Outlook 2007

  World Energy Use (Quads)
Source: DOE/EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2007

 US Energy Use (Quads)
                            Source: DOE/EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2006

              US Electric Generation by Fuel

                        2006 – 4,065 B kWh
Billion kWh

                                                 Should be 3927 B kWh
                                                 (2 years ahead)
                    ASPO Sep 2006

Actual Production
2003 – 79.62 Mbd
2004 – 83.12 Mbd
2005 – 84.63 Mbd
2006 – 84.60 Mbd
2007 – 84.34 Mbd
DOE/EIA, November 2007

 Petroleum Prices
Natural Gas Prices
Source: DOE/EIA 2007 (thru August)

  Natural Gas Prices
Source: DOE/EIA 2007

  Coal Prices
      U.S. Energy Flows 2006

                           Source: DOE/EIA 2007
Renewable Energy
         US Energy Production Last year:
                 PV grew 33%
                 Wind grew 27%
                 Biofuels grew >23%
                 Coal grew 2.5%
                 Natural Gas grew 2.3%
                 Oil grew 1.0%
                 Nuclear Electric grew 1.0%
Atmospheric CO2
     Carbon Emissions
―Unknowingly, the
 architecture and
 building community is
 responsible for almost
 half of all U.S.
 greenhouse gas
 emissions annually.
 Globally the
 percentage is even

                          US Energy Information Administration
                          statistics Graphic Published first in Metropolis
                          Magazine, October 2003 Issue
Energy Trends in Buildings
Average energy consumption (Btu/sq. ft)
     Before 1920         80,127
     1920 – 1945         90,234
     1946 – 1959         80,198
     1960 – 1969         90,976
     1970 – 1979         94,968
     1980 – 1989       100,077
     1990 – 1999         88,834
     2000 – 2003         79,703
   Source: EIA/DOE 2006 Energy Book
   They predict no improvement in
    efficiency for the next 30 years for new
    or existing!
   What are they smoking???? Or ????
    Opportunity for Change
   Each year in the United States, we tear down
    approximately 1.75 billion square feet of buildings,
    renovate 5 billion square feet, and build new
    another 5 billion square feet.
   During the next 30 years, some 50 billion square
    feet will be torn down, some 150 billion will be
    renovated, and another 150 billion will be built
   By 2030, three-quarters of the built environment
    will be either new or renovated.
    AIA COTE: Ecology and Design: Ecological Literacy in Architecture
    Education, 2006
AIA 2030 Position Statement

   Promote sustainable design including
    resource conservation to achieve a minimum
    50 percent reduction from the current level of
    consumption of fossil fuels used to construct
    and operate new and renovated buildings by
    the year 2010, and promote further
    reductions of remaining fossil fuel
    consumption by 10 percent or more in each
    of the following five years.

                           Source: AIA November 2005
AIA 2010 Goals
   AIA baseline is ENERGY STAR® Target Finder.
   This is the average building of that type in that weather
   Average Office building in Chicago uses:
       92.3 kBtu/sf (5,000 sf)
       101.5 kBtu/sf (20,000 sf)
       113.3 kBtu/sf (100,000 sf)
   Pretty weak standard!
   ASHRAE Std 90.1-1999 yields about 67 kBtu/sf for an
    office building (including plug loads).
   If we target 30% below that (about 47 kBtu/sf), you will
    get an AIA 2010 building.
ASHRAE Actions
   Advanced Energy Design Guides:
       30%, 50%, 75%, then Net Zero Energy
       Small Buildings (<20,000sf)
       Office, Retail, K-12 Schools, Warehouses, Highway
        Lodging, High-rise Residential, and Existing
   Schedule:
       Complete all 30% guides by 2008.
       Complete all 50% guides by 2011.
       Complete all 70% guides by 2016.
       Complete ―net-zero‖ guidance 2020.
    ASHRAE Actions/Initiatives

   Standard 90.1-2007 Energy Standard for
    Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Bldgs
    - 5 to -7% below 2004.
   Standard 90.1-2010 Energy Standard for
    Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Bldgs
    30 percent reduction from 90.1-2004.
   California requiring commercial buildings to
    be net zero energy by 2020 and residential
    building to be net zero energy by 2030.
    Why Be Energy Efficient?

   Reduce operating costs.
   Stabilize atmospheric carbon & reduce global
    climate change impacts.
   Improve the quality of life in our buildings and
   The energy efficiency policies, building and
    appliance codes, incentives, and technology
    improvements in the U.S. since the mid-1970s now
    avoid the use of approximately:
       40 quadrillion Btu—roughly 40 percent of the energy
        currently consumed.
       Emission of more than 2 billion tons of CO2 per year.
    Energy Efficiency
   The cost of saving energy is going down while
    the price of energy is going up.
   Efficiency is the cleanest, cheapest, safest,
    and most secure source energy we have.
   These savings from energy efficiency to date
    have not yet come close to tapping the full
    potential for savings.
   Incentives are available under EPAct 2005 to
    get deductions and tax credits for energy
    efficiency and renewable energy.
    Energy Opportunities
   SEDAC has looked at about 200 commercial
   Potential energy savings ranged from a high
    of 80% to a low of 3%for existing buildings
    and between 86% and 12% for new designs.
   Data from 70 existing buildings shows:
       32% energy savings.
       34% energy cost savings.
   Data from 39 new building designs shows:
       41% energy savings.
       38% energy cost savings.
   We estimate is costs a client about $68/million Btu
    to save energy. This is heavily weighted towards
   Our program of analysis costs about $16/million
    Btu of recommended savings.
   Current energy costs are around $11/MBtu of
    Natural Gas and $27/MBtu of Electricity.
   Energy savings are about 1/3 electricity and 2/3
    natural gas.
   Weighted cost of about $17 with a 4 year payback.
    (Not good enough for many businesses.)
    Sustainability for a Region

   Analyzed Fort Bragg, Fayetteville, NC,
    and the eight counties around it.
   Modeled dynamic urban growth for 35
    years into the future.
   Develop energy and water projections
    associated with that growth based on
    business as usual.
   Analyzed potential interventions to
    change the future.
    Project Future Change

Land Use Evolution and
Impact Assessment Model

           Columbus/Ft Benning
Fort Bragg
3% population growth per year
 Perform Gap Analysis


               + 500,000 population
               + 200,000 households
               + 260 million sq. ft. of
               - 19,000 acres of agriculture
               - 34,000 acres of forest
  The Concept
                Preferred Future State

                          Possible Future
Current State
                          resulting from
                          actions taken
                          along the way

     Energy Model
                         Comm Energy Factors
                                                                                   Commercial Trans
  New Comm Ind Bldgs
                                                             Public Transit                        Residentail Trans

                                                    Comm Ind Energy Usage

              Existing Comercial
             Industrial Bldg Stock                                                      Transportation Energy Usage

    Land Use Change                                                                TOTAL ENERGY USAGE

                                                Residential Energy Usage
                                                                                             Infrastructure Energy Usage
    Existing Residential Bldg Stock
                                                                                 Agricultural Energy Usage

New Residential Bldgs                                                                   Agricultural Energy Factors
                            Residential Energy Factors
                                                         Land Use Change      Agricultural Lands
Total Energy   41% Increase
        Energy Interventions
   Building Code Adoption over time:
       2010 – 30% Reduction
       2015 – 50% Reduction
       2020 – 75% Reduction
       2025 – Net Zero Energy Buildings
   Existing Building Initiatives:
       2015 – 20% Target
       2025 – 40% Target
   Agricultural Initiatives:
       2015 – Energy Efficiency 35% Potential
       2015 – Renewable Energy 25% Potential
   Transportation Initiatives (2012 – 40%):
       Biofuels
       GHG Standards
       HEV/PHEV Penetration
Energy Efficiency And Renewables
Energy Intervention
          Air Emissions Model

       Pollution Control Porgrams                Nonpoint Source Emissions

                                                        Technology Change                       AIR EMISSIONS
        Emission Factors
Total Energy Consumption
                                                        Point Source Emiisions

                                    Built Environment

                                                                            Airshed Cleansing
                                        LandUse Change

                                                                                                Carbon Sequestration

            A 48% Increase
Air Emissions
Air Emissions
Regional CO2 Implications
         Water Model
                                                Comm Ind Water Usage
Comm Ind Water Factors

                                                                                     TOTAL WATER USAGE
   New Comm Ind Bldgs

               Existing Comercial
              Industrial Bldg Stock                                                    Infrastructure Water Losses

                 Conservation Practices
     Land Use Change                                      Agricultural Water Usage

                                                  Residential Water Usage
                                                                                         Agricultural Water Factors
     Existing Residential Bldg Stock

                                                         Conservation Practices
New Residential Bldgs
                                                                                          Agricultural Lands
                            Residential Water Factors
                                                              Land Use Change
     Intervention BMPs

   Fort Bragg (2004)
   Public System Water Loss
    Control (2010)
   Commercial/Industrial Water
    Conservation Program (2012)
   Resident Water Conservation
    Program (2015)
   Agricultural Water
    Conservation Program (2018)
    Regional Actions
   Regional intervention requires long tern
    approached with regional stakeholders to
    enable planning initiatives.
   Intervention done in a timely manner can
    made a tremendous difference in a region.
   The trick is getting all the vested interests to
    engage and actually start to change policy for
    a sustainable future
   Incentives are required to get people to adopt
    new technology and new ways.
   Water is more intractable than energy.
Earth’s Water
    Energy/Water Nexus
   The major fresh water consuming sectors are not
    buildings – they are agriculture and thermoelectric
   Agriculture and thermoelectric use about 40%
    each, while buildings use about 12% of the supply.
   Our energy security is closely linked to the state of
    our water resources. Water resources are require
    to achieve any sort of energy security in the years
    and decades ahead.
   Our water security cannot be guaranteed without
    careful attention to related energy issues. The two
    issues are inextricably linked.
            Fresh Water in the US

                                    USGS 2004

All numbers in MGD
    Energy/Water Nexus
   Each kilowatt hour of electricity requires about
    27 gallons of water.
   500 MW coal-fired power plant requires over 12
    million gallons per hour of water for cooling and
    other process requirements such as scrubbing
    sulfur dioxide from the stack gases.
   Energy security rests on two principles – using
    less energy to provide needed services and
    having access to technologies that provide a
    diverse supply of reliable, affordable and
    environmentally sound energy.
   Thermoelectric power plants don’t get us there.
    Proposed Energy Sources

   New electrical sources that don’t use water:
       Photovoltaics
       Wind turbines
       Low-head hydro
       Coal gasification combined cycle (CGCC)
   New energy sources for liquid fuels:
       Tar sands
       Oil shale
       Coal to liquids
       Biofuels – Ethanol & Biodiesel
Source: USDOE, Oct 2007

         Ethanol from Corn
Water Associated

   Oil Shale – 1-3 barrels per barrel oil
       Production level of 2.5 million bbl/day
        requires 105-315 MGD.
       Associated water consumption with
        development 58 MGD.
   Tar Sands – 2-4 barrels/bbl
       Plus 4% of Canada NG supply.
   Coal to Liquids – 5-7 bbl/bbl.
Energy/Water Nexus

   Informs us that the path is not with
    traditional energy sources.
   We must greatly increase the energy
    and water efficiency of our built
    environment and agriculture.
   Water is going to be a bigger and
    tougher problem than energy to solve.
   Non-water based renewables must be
    our focus.

To top