Metrics That Matter: Energy Efficiency in Laboratories Pam Greenley MIT EHS Associate Director greenley@mit.edu Steve Lanou MIT Deputy Director, Sustainability slanou@mit.edu

Intro

What Does Campus Sustainability Mean at MIT? Minimizing our campus energy and environmental footprint Building and supporting a local community Leading by example – sharing results Creating a learning laboratory – “mens et manus” Enabling and facilitating community aspirations

MIT is a city unto itself Both natural landscapes and systems: water, land, air, even some habitat! And technological systems All these areas are living laboratories with challenges and opportunities abound!

Translating Sustainability Into Action Power Production Conservation & Efficiency Sustainable Design Transportation & Operations Waste, Recycling & Composting Community Engagement Educational Opportunities Community interested in sustainability continually expanding Issues around climate change has galvanized students, staff and faculty Our challenge: Keeping the ball moving forward on our stewardship initiatives – demand is high from community Ensuring we engage the diverse community CONSTUCTIVELY and aligned with our campus goals/objectives Managing sustainability at MIT: Lead responsibilities for sustainability shared between DOF and our EHS Headquarters office DOF taking the lead on integrating sustainability into our capital projects, engineering, operations and planning EHS plays lead role coordinating diverse activities, building institutional support, communicating progress and engaging our community stakeholders (students, town, peers) Many other departments taking the lead in their respective areas of expertise: Information Services & Technology – own energy initiative Power production highlights 1995 co-gen investment – improving plant efficiency 18% and reducing C02 emissions 32% Co-gen expansion looks attractive for additional improvements and CO2 reductions Solar initiatives have installed 60 kw capacity in 4 installations – strong interest and learning opportunity Conservation and Efficiency: $3 million over past several years is returning $2.2m in annual savings. Lighting, steam traps, and data-based commissioning and fume hood face velocity reductions recent creation of a revolving fund for conservation is EXTREMELY promising – testament of confidence in DOFs approach more details in Julia's presentation Sustainable design Early commitment to green building and progress in integrating sustainable design paying off: LEED Gold in new grad dorm; Sloan School will be at least Gold and use 50% less energy than any other similar building on campus Transportation Through aggressive Transportation Demand Management Programs: single vehicle occupant (SOV) trips reduced 15% from 26% to 22%. MIT’s planning and transportation efforts for improving bicycling resources recognized by the City: cash bike commuter benefits ($240 year); shower facilities; and bike discount for lockers and showers in athletic facilities, lots more protected parking, dedicated bike lanes bisecting campus… Community Engagement: I will talk a bit about some highlights here… ***Report on Campus Energy Activities available*** HOLD UP

Current Metrics of “Sustainability” Trailing Indicators: Good for overall assessment; not good for decision-making; data reflects last fiscal year.

Current Metrics of “Sustainability”

Cumulative Energy Savings Energy Efficiency Success to Date Utilities purchased for FY12 $30M = < 3% of overall operating budget MIT ENERGY REDUCTION HISTORY update July 27,2012 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 Totals ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES SAVINGS in mmbtu (million btus) Lighting 2,880 925 5,333 4,640 8,062 Steam Traps 27,551 23,796 Continuous Commissioning 10,777 36,393 Variable Speed Drives NW35 5,360 CUP New chillers, Boiler 9, air compressor 10,836 3,216 New buildings Koch, E62, E60, W1 25,447 6,934 Demand ventilation and VSD Hayden Library 6,263 2,284 W70 replace chiller 3,300 46 Air change rate reduction 3,458 NW12 Cooling Loop 2,561 Residence Hall Refrigerator replacement 1,024 TOTAL EEMs (mmbtu)   30,430 11,701 41,725 52,545 30,839 191,038 $$ annual savings $ 570,800 $ 376,413 $ 151,111 $ 614,000 $ 1,793,000 $ 993,940 $ 4,499,264 Cumulative Energy Savings

You can’t build your way out

Building 18: Collaborative Experimentation Building 18 Chemistry Building Jeffrey Silverman Jim Doughty

Reduce Fume Hood Face Velocity Building-Wide Worked collaboratively with EHS experts to determine appropriate optimization of safety and efficiency Collaborated with leading faculty and researchers Tested range of face velocity rates Consensus rate of 80 feet per minute rate identified Recalibrated 130 hoods in Building 18 to 80 fpm from 100 Building control software modified Air control valves reset Air diffusers adjusted and relocated Certified all hoods to ASHRE 110 standard Results Cost: $306,000 Estimated Annual Savings: $162,000 Simple Payback: 2 years Performance monitored via Cimetrics system Reduced rate now used in new facilities

Four Types of Projects for EHS Involvement New Lab Buildings – Koch Institute Single Principle Investigator lab renovation Existing lab building energy conservation project Supervising undergraduate research projects My purpose in talking about our experience to share successes and lessons learned

Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research Research Mission – Integrating biological investigation with engineering technology 40 laboratories, 500 researchers 180,000 sq ft of research and work space 100 hoods, x bsc’s 30% less HVAC energy use/ LEED Gold

Koch Institute Design Process EHS brought in early Facilities and EHS agreed to approaches Type of hoods Type of controls Face Velocity Duct Velocity Heat Recovery Challenged rules of thumb Using existing labs to confirm plug load

Final Lab Ventilation Design EHS related considerations VAV and CV hoods 80 fpm, 18-inch sash height (60 in future) Occupied 6 ACH or hood min Unoccupied 4 ACH or hood min Heat pipe for heat recovery Picture or this?Other Important EC ACH driven by heat load(5 plug ,1 lighting w/ft2) Low duct velocity , 1200 vs 2000 feet per minute Segregation of freezers Cascading air from offices to labs Chilled beams in offices During schematic design with MIT EHS and Facilities only – 3 or 4 meetings Minimized surprises during design review

Koch Institute Lessons Learned To Date Researchers questioned containment of quiet hoods “Offices” in Labs Occupancy sensors need fine tuning We could have educated researchers before they were questioning hoods

Continuation of Program [Green Team Ongoing Education of researchers]

Comprehensive Stewardship Group What if metrics weren’t trailing, but were real-time? Or better…Predictive? From equipment level…

Comprehensive Stewardship Group To building level

Comprehensive Stewardship Group To portfolio level

The Perfect Lab Energy Conservation Project – Existing Building Common Goals Increase energy and material use efficiency Safer Labs (appropriate ventilaiton) More engaged and educated lab occupants Increased Comfort and productivity Lab level energy use info provided real time They understand how their lab ventilation system works. EHS looking for opportunities to increase knowledge of lab research activities and re

Process Steps- Existing Lab Project Scope – upgrade/re-lace hoods, equipment, plenum exhaust with HR, offices out of labs Set up Building User Group Lab level risk assessment done to determine correct number and type of hoods, what lab equipment replaced Design verified with computa-tional flow dynamics Behaviour change due to lab level EC information Commis-sioning