• No results found

Green Buildings Guidelines for Harvard

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Green Buildings Guidelines for Harvard"

Copied!
39
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Green

Buildings

Guidelines for

Harvard

Presentation to the Administrative Deans.

October 26th 2007

(2)

Test Average Savings of Green Buildings

ENERGY

SAVINGS

30%

CARBON

SAVINGS

35%

WATER

USE

SAVINGS

30-50%

WASTE

COST

SAVINGS

50-90%

Source: Capital E Source: www.usgbc.org

(3)

Test VERIFIED PERFORMANCE REDUCED LIABILITY & IMPROVED RISK MANAGEMENT REDUCED ABSENTEEISM ENHANCED RECRUITMENT IMPROVED EMPLOYEE MORALE PRODUCTIVITY

30 Year Cost of a Building

Viewed over a 30 year period: Capital cost = 2%

Operations & maintenance costs = 6%

Personnel costs = 92%

What is a Green Building?

Green buildings provide healthier work environments through:

• Increased natural daylight

• Ventilation and temperature control

•Reduced indoor air pollution

(4)

Test

Levels of LEED Ratings

Green Buildings

worldwide are certified

with a voluntary,

consensus-based

rating system.

USGBC has four

levels of LEED.

Source: www.usgbc.org

What is the USGBC and LEED?

52-69 points 39-51 points 33-38 points 26-32 points

(5)

Test What is the LEED System? LEADERSHIP in ENERGY and ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN A leading-edge system for certifying DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, & OPERATIONS of the greenest buildings in the world

Scores are tallied for different aspects of efficiency and design in appropriate

categories.

For instance, LEED assesses in detail: 1. Site Planning 2. Water Management 3. Energy Management 4. Material Use 5. Indoor Environmental Air Quality 6. Innovation & Design Process Source: www.usgbc.org

(6)

What is History of Green Building at Harvard?

What is the

history of green

building design at

Harvard?

(7)

2001 2006 2007 2001: HGCI initiates first 3 pilot LEED projects 2004

What is History of Green Building at Harvard?

21 LEED Projects 5 Certified 16 Registered 2005 26 LEED Projects 7 Certified 19 Registered 16 LEED Projects 4 Certified 12 Registered 7 LEED Projects 2 Certified 5 Registered

(8)

Landmark Center, HSPH

42,000 Build-Out, Underfloor Air Distribution, Digitally controlled Lighting w/T-5 Lamps

LEED Certified

Harvard School of Public Health

(9)

Dunster / Mather Kitchen and Serveries

First Institution Kitchen to Achieve LEED, Dual-Flush Toilets, Melink Variable Speed Drive Stove Hoods, Composting System

LEED Silver Certified

(10)

Aldrich Hall

Campus Lighting Master Plan, Preferred Parking for Fuel Efficient Vehicles, Green Cleaning Program, high performance ventilation 13 Filters, 80% C&D Waste Diversion

LEED Silver Pending

(11)

90 Mt. Auburn St.

Ground Source Heat Pumps, No Irrigation, Indoor Air Quality Testing Prior to Occupancy, Untreated Concrete Floors and Walls, Green Cleaning for All of HRES U&C,

Photo by: Nathan Gauthier

LEED Gold Certified

Photo by: Nathan Gauthier

(12)

Hamilton Hall, Harvard Business School

Occupancy Sensor Controlled Thermostats, $370,000 of Plyboo Furnishings, Tested Low-Flow Shower Heads Before Selecting Symmons 2.0, HGCI Performed Daylight and Views Calcs.

Photo by: Nathan Gauthier

Photo by: Nathan Gauthier

Photo by: Nathan Gauthier

LEED Gold Pending

Photo by: Nathan Gauthier

(13)

Weld Hill Research Center Seeking LEED Gold

Closed loop geothermal system for heating and cooling, ventilation rates for lab space designed to 6 air changes per hour with night time set-back

(14)

First Science Center Seeking LEED Gold

Allston Development Group

Highest energy performance goal of any lab design at Harvard, careful attention to materials selections, onsite stormwater re-use

(15)

46 Blackstone LEED Platinum Certified

University Operations Services

Submitted to USGBC in September, 55 Points Pending – 52 Required for LEED Platinum, Highest energy performance of any Harvard LEED building, bioswale, energy efficient elevator

(16)

Trial Design Process Building Project Evaluation Recommend Trial Design Process Building Project Evaluation Recommendations Trial Design Process Building Project Evaluation Recommend Trial Design Process Building Project Evaluation Recommendations Harvard now has 26 LEED registered or certified buildings

2002 2003 2004 2005

Continuous Improvement 2002-2007:

Reduced Costs, Streamlined Certification, Staff Expertise, Information Resources, LEED accredited staff

The Allston Development Group has committed to LEED Gold for all buildings in Allston HBS has committed to LEED Gold for all building renovations and construction

(17)

What are the

proposed Green

Building

Guidelines for

Harvard?

(18)

Development Process

Complete

• 2004: President Summers: Approves Sustainability Principles including a commitment to integrate sustainability into capital approvals process.

• 2004-7: LEED project experience expanded across the University

• Feb 2007: UCMC: Established interfaculty committee to draft guidelines • March – Oct: Guidelines developed by committee over 11 meetings

• Financial Deans: Consensus of approval

• CPRC: Approval with request to research LEED Gold for New Construction • UCMC: Approval with request to research LEED Gold for New Construction

Ongoing

• Administrative Deans: Provide comment • UCMC: Approval final draft

• President Faust: To Review for approval in November

• UCMC Interfaculty Committee: To continue research into LEED Gold option for New Construction and provide recommendations in early 2008

(19)

FY07 Capital Project Costs

Number of Projects > $5 million = 8 = $142,440,908 (46% of $)

Number of Projects < $5 million = 55 = $121,777,222 (40% of $)

Under $1 million = 125 = $43,712,714 (14% of $)

The high volume projects < $5 million projects provides an

equally significant opportunity to reduce University operating

(20)

DRAFT

Green Building Guidelines

Projects Over $5 million

The University will adopt a policy that capital projects, including new construction, major and partial renovation exceeding $5 million, will be subject to green building guidelines:

Capital projects exceeding $5 million will seek minimum LEED Silver certification.

The University encourages higher levels of certification. The applicability of the LEED requirement will be determined in preliminary consultation with the CPRC.

Harvard University requires a number of LEED credits to be treated as pre-requisites for its projects. These credits will address energy, metering and indoor

environmental quality requirements.

An “Integrated Design” approach is to be adopted. Green design charrettes, involving

all design team members (including operations staff), will be conducted at early stages in the project.

Life Cycle Costing assessment is to be conducted throughout the project to ensure

that operations and maintenance cost projections are established and effective comparative analyses are conducted for targeted building elements.

Energy modeling is required, meeting Harvard’s basic energy modeling guidelines.

All new construction and major renovation projects are to adopt an ongoing

(21)

DRAFT

Green Building Guidelines

Projects Under $5 million

Capital projects under $5 million (over $100K) will be encouraged to meet recommended

performance requirements specific to the following types of building upgrade:

– Lighting – HVAC – Building Envelope – Plug Load – Plumbing Fixtures – Interior Architecture – Furniture and Seating

– Landscaping and Stormwater – Fume Hoods

• All performance requirements are based on LEED for Commercial Interiors and LEED for

New Construction. Certification is NOT required.

• Performance requirements relating to the building envelop are based on the Advanced

Buildings Benchmark

All projects that have an ongoing utility cost implication must use life cycle costing to

(22)

What will be the

cost impact of the

proposed green

(23)

A report to California’s Sustainable Building Task

Force, a group of over 40 state agencies, with

funding from seven.

Drawing on cost data from 33 green building

projects and benefits data from over 100 buildings

nationwide. Developed in partnership with USGBC.

STUDY 1

:

The Costs and Financial Benefits of

Green Buildings

(24)

STUDY 1

:

The Costs and Financial Benefits of

Green Buildings

By: Greg Kats, Capital E

Average Green Premium vs. Level of Green Certification (for Offices and Schools)

0.66% 2.11% 1.82% 6.50% 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% Level 1-Certified (8 bldgs) Level 2-Silver (18 bldgs) Level 3-Gold (6 bldgs) Level 4-Platinum (1 bldgs)

Level of Green Certification

A v e ra g e G re e n P re m ium (i n p e rc e n t)

Average Green

Cost Premium

vs. Level of

Green

Certification –

33 buildings

US-wide

(25)

STUDY 1

:

The Costs and Financial Benefits of

Green Buildings

By: Greg Kats, Capital E

Reduced Energy Use in US Green Buildings

Certified Silver Gold Average Energy Efficiency 8% 30% 37% 28%

On-Site Renewable Energy 0% 0% 4% 2%

Green Power 10% 0% 7% 6%

(26)

• This study compared construction costs of 83 LEED buildings

to 138 similar non-LEED buildings (221 sample total).

• The building types analyzed included academic buildings,

laboratories, libraries , community centers and ambulatory

care facilities.

• All costs were normalized for time and location in order to

ensure consistency for the comparisons. Cost per square foot

was compared between all projects

STUDY 2

:

Cost of Green Revisited

(27)

• The 2006 study shows essentially the same results as 2004:

there is no significant difference in average costs for

green buildings as compared to non-green buildings.

• Many project teams are building green buildings with little or

no added cost, and with budgets well within the cost range of

non-green buildings with similar programs.

• We have also found that, in many areas of the country, the

contracting community has embraced sustainable design, and

no longer sees sustainable design requirements as additional

burdens to be priced in their bids.

STUDY 2

:

Cost of Green Revisited

(28)

STUDY 3

:

LEED Credits at Harvard

by HGCI 40 11 3 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Point is no cost and often given in Harvard

projects

Potential cost impact, but will result in reduced

operations costs

Point has cost implication and an associated human health / comfort / productivity benefit

Point has additional cost impact with strictly an

environment benefit

Over 20 LEED Projects at Harvard have shown that there are 40 credits that can be achieved at no added cost if the process is managed effectively.

(29)

STUDY 4

:

Green Cost Data for Two Harvard Historic

(30)

Additional Soft Costs

Enhanced Commissioning $4,832

Energy Modeling $13,200

Green Building Consultant $15,460

C&D Waste Consultant $34,032

LEED Certification Costs $2,200

MEP design review, recommissioning manual & verification of operator

training

Promotes integrated design and

identifies energy savings from ECMs Guides team through sustainable

design process & manages LEED effort Salvage significant quantities of

materials for donation & targeting > 95% waste diversion rates

Hold team member accountable & 3rd

party verification of sustainability PROJECT 1

(31)

Additional Soft Costs

Total Project Cost = $18,509,114

Total Soft Costs = $2,358,275

Total Green Soft Costs = $69,724

_______________________________________________________________________

Green Soft Costs as % of Total = 0.38%

Green Soft Costs as % of Total Soft = 2.96%

(32)

Energy Conservation Measures that

Resulted from Soft Cost Investment

Improved Building Envelope $20,971

Variable Frequency Drives $29,000

Lighting Optimization $25,000

Lighting Controls $5,625

CO2 Sensors in Cafeteria $4,000

Hot water temperature difference $2,450

Melink System $12,500

Pressure Independent Control Valves $5,576

Energy Recovery Wheel $10,000

Fan Coil Unit Fan Cycling $0

---Total capital cost of ECMs $115,122

= %0.062 of total project cost PROJECT 1

(33)

Total ECM Cost = $115,122

Total First Year Energy Savings = $22,336

Internal Rate of Return = 25.98%

ECMs pay for themselves in < 6 years

Energy Conservation Measures

Total Green Cost Premium = 1% of the total project cost

(34)

• $320K Estimated Material Cost of LEED ~ 2.5% of total project cost

• Estimated Energy Savings ($35,000) Annually

• Estimated < 10 year payback

Hamilton Hall

cost estimates

(35)

A LEED Silver or Gold certification requirement, if

introduced early and managed effectively, will result in

a minimal additional cost to the project.

This addition will typically be less than 2% total project

cost.

It is also possible that there may be no additional cost.

Significant operating savings can be expected as a

result.

(36)

A LEED Silver or Gold certification requirement, if

introduced early and managed effectively, will result in

a minimal additional cost to the project.

This addition will typically be less than 2% total project

cost.

It is also possible that there may be no additional cost.

Significant operating savings can be expected as a

result.

(37)

What can be said

about the cost

impact of not

implementing

Harvard’s new

green building

guidelines?

(38)

FY06 actual cost = $86,850,000

FY16 projected cost =

$157,052,000

Projection is based on:

• Linear trendline from actual usage from FY1990 – 2006 showing usage increasing by 103,462 MMBTU per year if stays on same trend.

• Projected cost increases of about 3.5% per year (actual projected cost increases for FY08-12 are higher)

Source: UOS Utility Reports and Longwood Operations Departments

Total Building Energy Use from FY90-06 and projected through FY16

y = 103462x + 1E+06 R2 = 0.9381 -500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 FY 90 FY 91 FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 Fiscal Year M M B TU

(39)

Comments?

References

Related documents

7.34: Average inpainting processing time of file music11_16khz with gap size of 1600 samples and various window length.... 7.35: Ratio of synthesis/analysis average

And with one year of quality lessons, plus the bonus quarter on the Life of Christ, you won’t need to scramble for new class materials any time soon.. Church Edition: Church

Yine Lepidopter’lere dayanıklılık sağlayan Bacillus thuringiensis endotoksin geni (Bt), özellikle mısır ve pamuk yetiştiriciliğinde zararlı olan tırtıllara karşı

Secondly, following diagnosis at the specialist reference centre, if an athlete with HA states an intention to continue competing in Athletics, it falls to the Expert Medical Panel

Taking Energy Efficiency Heating as an example and using all the available samples as training set, the trees grown by CART, M5’ and MPTree are presented in Figures 4, 5 and

Satellite monitoring services from Central Alliance use post-processed satellite imagery but also rely on our interpretation skills to deliver specific geo-information (e.g.

In an ideal scenario, it would be beneficial to consider the bottlenecks between the opsets and procrastinate some operations before scheduling it on the server. To reach