1. T IMOTHY C ONROY MAE C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGEMENT S PRING 2010 J IM F AUST

2. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS P ROJECT O VERVIEW § 2175 K S TREET NW, W ASHINGTON DC 20037 § 8- STORY EXISTING CONCRETE BUILDING (B UILT IN 1981) § 3- NEW STRUCTURAL STEEL LEVELS § 108,000 SQUARE FEET § 37,500 SQUARE FEET NEW CONSTRUCTION § C ONTRACT V ALUE : $15.5 MILLION GMP § D ELIVERY M ETHOD : CM A GENCY WITH GC § S CHEDULE D URATION : F EB 07 TO M AR 10 P ROJECT T EAM § O WNER : M INSTALL S TEWART P ROPERTIES § A RCHITECT : FOX A RCHITECTS § S TRUCTURAL E NGINEER : R ATHGEBER /G OSS A SSOCIATES § MEP E NGINEER : META E NGINEERS § G ENERAL C ONTRACTOR : J AMES G. D AVIS C ONSTRUCTION 2 Rendering Provided by FOX Architectshttp://maps.google.com/

3. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS O VERALL G OAL § T HE THEME FOR THE SELECTED ANALYSIS TOPICS IS REDUCING BUILDING ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION WHILE MINIMIZING UPFRONT COSTS WHEREVER POSSIBLE AND PROVIDING THE OWNER WITH A BUILDING WITH A HIGHER OVERALL VALUE. 3 G REEN B UILDING R ESEARCH I N THE U NITED S TATES ALONE, BUILDINGS ACCOUNT FOR : 72% OF ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION, 39% OF ENERGY USE, 38% OF ALL CARBON DIOXIDE (CO 2 ) EMISSIONS, 40% OF RAW MATERIALS USE, 30% OF WASTE OUTPUT (136 MILLION TONS ANNUALLY ), AND 14% OF POTABLE WATER CONSUMPTION. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=1718 http://www.usgbc.org http://www.geindustrial.com/

4. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS T HERE ARE SUBSTANTIAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH BACKUP GENERATORS YET THEY ARE ONLY USED IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION OR TO TEST ITS OPERATION 4 http://www.cat.com/

5. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS I S IT POSSIBLE TO USE THE BUILDING ’ S EXISTING BACKUP GENERATOR TO OFFSET ITS ELECTRICAL USAGE ? T HIS ANALYSIS LOOKS INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF THE ABOVE STATEMENT 5 http://www.cat.com/

6. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS B ENEFITS O FFSET BUILDING ’ S ELECTRICAL DEMAND D RAWBACKS D ANGEROUS BYPRODUCTS OF COMBUSTION S OUND GENERATION AND HEARING LOSS 6

7. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS B ASE C ASE (C UMMINS D IESEL G ENERATOR ) C APACITY : 350 K W F UEL C ONSUMPTION : 23.15 GAL / HR Y EARLY S AVINGS : $96,283 Y EARLY F UEL C OST : $143,782 N ET S AVINGS : -$47,499 B REAK E VEN : 15.50 GAL / HR 7

8. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A LTERNATE C ASE (C AT N ATURAL G AS G ENERATOR ) C APACITY : 1040 K W F UEL C ONSUMPTION : 7899 FT 3 / HR Y EARLY S AVINGS : $333,782 Y EARLY F UEL C OST : $198,473 N ET S AVINGS : $135,308 B REAK E VEN : N/A B ASE C ASE (C UMMINS D IESEL G ENERATOR ) C APACITY : 350 K W F UEL C ONSUMPTION : 23.15 GAL / HR Y EARLY S AVINGS : $96,283 Y EARLY F UEL C OST : $143,782 N ET S AVINGS : -$47,499 B REAK E VEN : 15.50 GAL / HR 8

9. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS B ASE C ONSTRUCTION C ONCRETE AND CMU W ALL 2” T HK H OLLOW M ETAL D OOR 9

10. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS (S UBTITLE ) B ASE C ONSTRUCTION C ONCRETE AND CMU W ALL 2” T HK H OLLOW M ETAL D OOR A LTERNATE C ONSTRUCTION C ONCRETE AND CMU W ALL 2” T HK H OLLOW M ETAL D OOR 2” X 4” S TAGGERED W OOD S TUDS 16” O. C. 5/8” G YPSUM B OARD B OTH S IDES 10

11. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS S CHEDULE I MPACT C ONSTRUCTION T IME : 1-2 D AYS G AS L INE I NSTALLATION : 15 TO 20 D AYS N ET I MPACT ON O VERALL S CHEDULE : 0 D AYS C ONSTRUCTABILITY I MPACT A LL G ENERATORS S TUDIED F IT WITHIN S PACE C ONSTRAINTS N O A DDITIONAL D UCTWORK N EEDED P AYBACK P ERIOD Generator Room LayoutProposed Wall Construction 11 G ENERATOR T YPE C APACITY ( K W) A NNUAL E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A DDITIONAL C OST P AYBACK P ERIOD D IESEL 300($47,499)$58,800--N/A N ATURAL G AS 350($35)$137,200$40,076N/A N ATURAL G AS 450$6,054$176,400$40,07635.76 N ATURAL G AS 1040$135,308$507,680$40,0764.05

12. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS S OUND A TTENUATION S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS C ONCLUSIONS N ATURAL G AS GENERATORS ARE BETTER SUITED E FFICIENCY CAN BE GAINED WITH LARGER CAPACITY GENERATORS P RE - PLANNING IS A MUST G ENERATOR SELECTION E NCLOSURE CONSTRUCTION A DEQUATE FUEL SUPPLY F URTHER RESEARCH NEEDED INTO MORE EFFERENT GENERATORS 12

13. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS B UILDING R OOF A CCOUNTS FOR 25% OF BUILDING ENVELOPE N UMEROUS ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS O CCUPANT B ENEFITS 13

14. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS 14 U TILIZE THE BENEFICIAL PROPERTIES OF A GREEN ROOF TO ADD VALUE TO THE PROJECT WHILE MINIMIZING THE ADDED COST http://www.safeguardeurope.com/diagrams/flat-green-roof-build-up.jpg

15. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS B ENEFITS I NCREASED DURABILITY OF ROOF ASSEMBLY A LLOWS TIME FOR VEGETATION TO DEVELOP BEFORE INSTALLATION R EDUCED H EAT I SLAND E FFECT R EDUCTION OF S MOG D ECREASED STORMWATER RUNOFF A DDED HABITAT FOR BIRDS, PLANTS, AND INSECTS D RAWBACKS M ODULAR SYSTEM HAS A NEGLIGIBLE EFFECT ON THERMAL RESISTANCE I NCREASED STRUCTURAL LOADS A DDED MAINTENANCE 15

16. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS E XISTING S YSTEM G RAVEL B ALLAST F ULLY A DHERED S INGLE P LY EPDM R IGID I NSULATION TAPERED TOWARD THE ROOF DRAINS 3” DEEP RIB 20 GAUGE METAL ROOF DECK 16 Image Provided by DAVIS Construction

17. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS 17 G REEN R OOF (G REEN G RID ® S YSTEM ) E XTENSIVE G REEN G RID ® R OOF S YSTEM V EGETATION 4” OF GROWTH MEDIA R OOT B ARRIER /F ILTER F ABRIC G REEN G RID M ODULE U NIT W EIGHT 20 PSF I NSTALLATION R ATE : 3,000 TO 5,000 SQFT PER DAY (8,000 SQFT MAX ) N O I NSTALLATION B ETWEEN O CTOBER AND A PRIL G REEN R OOF A REA

18. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS L IMITING F ACTOR : B EAMS C ONCRETE ON M ETAL D ECK : 3C20 - 7” ( T =4”) NW L OAD C ARRYING C APACITY : B EAMS : R EVERSE L OOKUP IN S TEEL M ANUAL D ECK : V OLCRAFT D ECK C ATALOGUE S EVEN L OAD C OMBINATIONS C HECKED R ESULTING N ET A DDITIONAL L OAD : 69.60 PSF 18

19. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS D EFLECTION A NALYSIS G REEN R OOF L OAD M AX D EFLECTION : 0.2092” (0% OF B EAMS F AIL ) F ULLY L OADED M AX D EFLECTION :0.2549” (20% OF B EAMS F AIL ) 19

20. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS R OOF F AILURE C AUSED BY S NOW L OAD (D UE TO RECENT SNOWFALL IN THE DC AREA ) 20 S NOW W ATER E QUIVALENT SWE P RECIP. ( IN. & FT.) T YPICAL 10-20% WINTER AND 20-40% SPRING 10%53.08” (4.42’) 20%26.54” (2.21’) 30%17.69” (1.47’) 40%13.27” (1.11’) 50%10.62” (0.89’) W ATER 100%5.31” (0.44’) Note: 10% SWE when air temp. is near 14 ° F 20% SWE when air temp. is near 32 ° F 100% SWE indicates max. distance from primary drain to secondary

21. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS E NERGY S AVINGS P RIMARILY A NALYZED C ONDUCTION B ASE M EMBRANE T EMPERATURE :158°F G REEN R OOF M EMBRANE T EMPERATURE : 86°F I NTERIOR D ESIGN T EMPERATURE : 72°F T HERMAL P ERFORMANCE 84% R EDUCTION IN T HERMAL G AIN 21

22. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS C OST C OMPARISON E XISTING EPDM R OOF C OST PER S QUARE F OOT : $11.00 T OTAL I NSTALLATION C OST : $60,500 Y EARLY S AVINGS : N/A 50 YEAR C OST : $375,500 P AYBACK P ERIOD : N/A M ODULAR G REEN R OOF C OST PER S QUARE F OOT : $19.26 T OTAL I NSTALLATION C OST : $105,900 Y EARLY S AVINGS : $5,056 50 Y EAR C OST : $105,900 P AYBACK P ERIOD : 20.9 YRS R ELATIVE P AYBACK P ERIOD : 7.4 YRS 22

23. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS S CHEDULE I MPACT I NSTALLATION TIME : 1 DAY (B ASED UPON 5,000 SQFT PER DAY ) W ORK COULD BE PERFORMED ON W EEKEND T HEREFORE NOT IMPACTING THE OVERALL PROJECT SCHEDULE C ONSTRUCTABILITY I MPACT P ROPOSED MODULAR SYSTEM USES EXISTING SUBSTRATE M ODULES ARE EASY TO INSTALL INTO GRID PATTERN 23

24. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING D ESIGN P ROPOSED C HANGES S TRUCTURAL L OAD A NALYSIS R ESULTING E NERGY S AVINGS C OST A NALYSIS S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY C ONCLUSION § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS C ONCLUSION T OTAL C OST : $105,900 P AYBACK P ERIOD : 20.9 YRS A DDED C OST : $45,400 P AYBACK P ERIOD : 7.4 YRS A NNUAL E NERGY S AVINGS : $5,056 C OST PER S QUARE F OOT N EW C ONSTRUCTION : $3.14 24

25. P RESENTATION O UTLINE C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS B UILDING F AÇADE A CCOUNTS FOR 75% OF B UILDING E NVELOPE T YPICALLY ALL F OUR E LEVATIONS ARE T REATED THE S AME IN T ERMS OF D ESIGN E ACH E LEVATION RECEIVES D IFFERING A MOUNTS OF S OLAR G AIN AND T HEREFORE S HOULD BE D ESIGNED A CCORDINGLY § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 25

26. P RESENTATION O UTLINE C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS R EDESIGN THE B UILDING ’ S S OUTH AND W EST E LEVATIONS U SING S UPER I NSULATED G LAZING § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 26 Note: the information needed for this analysis was received relatively late in comparison to the other analyses and therefore this is only a partial analysis

27. P RESENTATION O UTLINE C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS B ENEFITS C USTOMIZING EACH ELEVATION BASED UPON SOLAR GAIN AND OTHER FACTORS CAN GREATLY INCREASE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE BUILDING ENVELOPE D RAWBACKS D OING SO RESULTS IN MULTIPLE DESIGNS WHICH ADD TIME AND INCREASE COST § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 27

28. P RESENTATION O UTLINE C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS E XISTING D ESIGN N ORTH : B RICK V ENEER WITH P UNCH W INDOWS E AST : B RICK V ENEER WITH R IBBON W INDOWS S OUTH AND W EST : H ARMON U NITIZED C URTAIN W ALL S YSTEM F ULL S TORY H EIGHT M ODULES U-V ALUE : 0.31 BTU / HR - FT 2 -° F S OLAR S HADING L OUVER S YSTEM § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 28 Image Provided by DAVIS Construction

29. P RESENTATION O UTLINE C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS P ROPOSED C HANGES N ORTH AND E AST : U NCHANGED S OUTH AND W EST : S CHUCO U NITIZED C URTAIN W ALL S YSTEM F ULL S TORY H EIGHT M ODULES U-V ALUE : 0.14 BTU / HR - FT 2 -° F B UILDING I NTEGRATED S OLAR C OLLECTORS T RANSLUCENT V ISION G LASS C OLLECTORS S EMITRANSPARENT N ON -V ISION G LASS C OLLECTORS § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 29

30. P RESENTATION O UTLINE C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS E NERGY S AVINGS 45% R EDUCTION DURING S UMMER 41% R EDUCTION DURING W INTER 167,323 K W HRS A NNUALLY $132,641 A NNUALLY *B ASED U PON G LAZING R EDESIGN ( NO SOLAR COLLECTORS ) § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 30 Mechanical Load Calculations

31. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS C OST C OMPARISON BY D ESIGN I NITIAL C OST VERSUS A DDED C OST Schuco FW50+.SI Curtain Wall System (Image Provided by Schuco USA) 31

32. P RESENTATION O UTLINE C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS S CHEDULE I MPACT S IMILAR WEIGHT SYSTEMS WOULD RESULT IN THE SAME INSTALLATION TIME C ONNECTION DETAILS ARE SIMILAR I F SOLAR COLLECTORS WERE INCORPORATED C ONNECTING PANEL WIRING TOGETHER I NSTALLING INVERTERS C ONNECTION TO BUILDING ELECTRICAL SYSTEM C ONSTRUCTABILITY I MPACT B OTH SYSTEMS CONSIST OF A INSULATING GLASS UNIT WITH TWO LITES OF THE SAME THICKNESSES § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION B ENEFITS AND D RAWBACKS D ESCRIPTION OF E XISTING S YSTEM P ROPOSED C HANGES E NERGY S AVINGS C OST C OMPARISON S CHEDULE AND C ONSTRUCTABILITY § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 32 *F URTHER RESEARCH WOULD BE NEEDED TO BETTER COVER THE TOPICS ADDRESSED IN THIS ANALYSIS

33. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION E NERGY S AVINGS C ONCLUSION § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS M OST P EOPLE L EAVE T HEIR C OMPUTERS R UNNING C ONTINUOUSLY WITHOUT E VER T URNING T HEM O FF S OME COMPUTERS ARE SET UP TO ENTER STAND - BY MODE WHEN NOT IN USE BUT THIS RESULTS IN MINIMAL ENERGY SAVINGS 33

34. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION E NERGY S AVINGS C ONCLUSION § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS R EDUNDANCY I F THE USER FORGETS TO PUT THE COMPUTER INTO S LEEP OR H IBERNATION MODE, PROGRAM THE COMPUTER TO DO SO P OWER STRIP RECOGNIZES POWER STATE OF COMPUTER AND CAN POWER OFF PERIPHERAL DEVICES AUTOMATICALLY S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS 34

35. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION E NERGY S AVINGS C ONCLUSION § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS B ASE C ASE ( ONE COMPUTER ) U NMANAGED C OMPUTER (A NNUALLY ) R UN T IME : 8,760 HRS E LECTRICITY U SAGE : 2,059 K W HR E LECTRICITY C OST : $317.64 M ANAGED C OMPUTER (A NNUALLY ) R UN T IME : 2,080 HRS E LECTRICITY U SAGE : 489 K W HR E LECTRICITY C OST : $75.42 76% R EDUCTION S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS 35 2175 K S TREET ( FOUR HUNDRED COMPUTERS ) U NMANAGED C OMPUTER (A NNUALLY ) R UN T IME : 3.5 MILLION HRS E LECTRICITY U SAGE : 823,440 K W HR E LECTRICITY C OST : $127,057 M ANAGED C OMPUTER (A NNUALLY ) R UN T IME : 832,000 HRS E LECTRICITY U SAGE : 195,520 K W HR E LECTRICITY C OST : $30,169 $96,888 SAVINGS ANNUALLY

36. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS A REA OF P OTENTIAL I MPROVEMENT P ROPOSED S OLUTION E NERGY S AVINGS C ONCLUSION § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS C ONCLUSION 50 Y EAR S AVINGS : $5.3 MILLION ($13,200 PER COMPUTER ) P AYBACK P ERIOD : 1.4 MONTHS N EW C OMPUTER I NTERVAL 5 Y EAR : $284,700 (R ED ) 3 Y EAR : $73,500 (Y ELLOW ) 2 Y EAR : -$32,000 (B LUE ) B REAKEVEN I NTERVAL : 2.39 YEARS (B ASED UPON D ELL O PTIPLEX 380 SFF WITH 22” M ONITOR - $580.00) S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS 36 http://www.flickr.com/

37. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS S UMMARY OF F INDINGS G RAND T OTALS : E NERGY S AVINGS : 3,047,529 K W HR A DDED C OST : $744,279 C OST S AVINGS : $378,583 P AYBACK P ERIOD : 1.97 YRS C OST PER S QUARE F OOT : 37 N EW C ONSTRUCTION T OTAL B UILDING B ACKUP G ENERATOR $16.31$3.17 G REEN R OOF $3.14$0.61 G LAZING R EDESIGN $2.28$0.44 S MART P OWER S TRIPS $0.36$0.07 $22.09$4.29

38. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS M ASTERS OF A RCHITECTURAL E NGINEERING 38 AE 542: B UILDING E NCLOSURE S CIENCE AND D ESIGN E NERGY T RANSFER E QUATIONS AND D ESIGN P RINCIPLES AE 597D: S USTAINABLE B UILDING M ETHODS O VERALL E NERGY C ONSERVATION T HEME F OUNDATION FOR B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS AE 572: P ROJECT D EVELOPMENT AND D ELIVERY P LANNING F INANCIAL M ODELS AND L IFECYCLE C OST A NALYSIS P AYBACK P ERIOD A NALYSIS

39. P RESENTATION O UTLINE § P ROJECT O VERVIEW § O VERALL G OAL § B ACKUP G ENERATOR A NALYSIS § G REEN R OOF A NALYSIS § C URTAIN W ALL R EDESIGN A NALYSIS § S MART P OWER S TRIP A NALYSIS § S UMMARY OF F INDINGS § A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS J AMES G. D AVIS C ONSTRUCTION C ORPORATION D ENNIS C OTTER E XECUTIVE V ICE P RESIDENT J AMES D UGAN S ENIOR V ICE P RESIDENT P AUL A THANAS P ROJECT E XECUTIVE J OHN P ACITTI P ROJECT M ANAGER P ATRICK C OTTER A SSISTANT P ROJECT M ANAGER W ILLIAM C OX A SSISTANT P ROJECT M ANAGER D ENNIS L EWIS S ENIOR S UPERINTENDENT L ESTER F UNKHOUSER S UPERINTENDENT S TEVE H AWRYLUK S ENIOR P ROJECT M ANAGER M INSHALL S TEWART P ROPERTIES J OHN S TEWART O WNER T HADDEUS M INSHALL O WNER F OX A RCHITECTS J. P. S PICKLER A RCHITECT B RAD K ING A RCHITECT D AVID B UDDENDECK A RCHITECT A LBAN T RACTOR C OMPANY W ESTON S OLUTIONS G REEN G RID ® S YSTEM C HRIS D ORMAN C LIENT S ERVICE M ANAGER S CHUCO USA D ENNIS H ASHAGEN A RCHITECTURAL S ALES A DVISOR T HE P ENNSYLVANIA S TATE U NIVERSITY D R. C HIMAY A NUMBA D EPARTMENT H EAD D R. K EVIN P ARFITT A SSOCIATE P ROFESSOR P ROFESSOR B OB H OLLAND A SSOCIATE P ROFESSOR D R. D AVID R ILEY A SSOCIATE P ROFESSOR J IM F AUST F ACULTY A DVISOR D R. C HRIS M AGENT F ACULTY A DVISOR F ELLOW F IFTH Y EAR S TUDENTS … … AND MOST OF ALL, MY FAMILY AND FRIENDS T HANK Y OU 39