1. Class Project Report Sustainable Air Quality, EECE 449/549, Spring 2009 Washington University, St. Louis, MO The Energy Analysis and Carbon Footprint of the Danforth University Center The Energy Analysis and Carbon Footprint of the Danforth University Center Instructors: Professor Rudolf B. Husar, Erin M. Robinson For more details see the class wikiclass wiki Students: Maiko Arashiro, Alex Clark, Neil Feinberg Mark Henson, Kerry Herr, Evan Kangas, Janna Lambson, Michael McDonald, Katie Poeltl, Cameron Smith, Kharel Thompson

2. Class Project: Energy Analysis and Carbon Footprint of the Danforth University Center Specific Objectives: 1.Analyze energy usage in the DUC 2.Apportion the energy use to activities in the DUC 3.Determine carbon footprint of the DUC 4.Renewable energy analysis for electricity

3. DUC Space Usage Offices Meeting Rooms Kitchen Dining and Social Areas The LEED Report indicates the space breakdown as: DUC

4. Raw Data Analysis—Time Series Charts and Daily Averages, March 11 – April 29, 2009

5. Raw Data Analysis—Diurnal Charts Show Four Energy Streams

6. Electricity Distribution Diagram - Dynamic Measured DATA Estimated Values

7. AHU-1 Supply Fan Daily Pattern Energy Usage Air Flow Rate

8. DUC HVAC – AHU-1 Energy Recovery Wheel, Btu Exhaust Heat Recovery DUC VAV Box Air Intake Hot Water Coil Hot Water Hot and Chill Water VAV Box Chilled Water Coil

9. Cool and Hot Water Data from March 12-April 15 2009

10. Cool and Hot Water Yearly Extrapolation Estimated yearly cold water usage: 6121 MMBtu Estimated yearly hot water usage: 7039 MMBtu Estimated annual costs: –Cool water: $ 18,464 –Hot water: $61,584 Estimated annual CO 2 emissions: –Cool water: 310 metric tons –Hot water: 436 metric tons

11. Energy coming into the DUC This energy is the amount metered at the DUC in MMBTUs

12. “MEASURED” VERSUS ACTUAL ENERGY USAGE CONVERSION BASIS: 1 kW/ton Refrigeration 80% Boiler Efficiency

13. DUC Carbon Footprint

14. Coal Power Analysis Consideration of powering the DUC entirely on coal power (close to reality): –No square feet of area need to be set aside by school –Costs roughly $8.50/hr or $0.045/kWhr (operation, maintenance, and distributed capital costs) –Over time period of our data (March 12 – Present) this option would have cost about $7,500 or $9,500 when factoring in the “social cost” of carbon. Pros: –Cheap, cheap, cheap –Doesn’t need area set aside for it, the power company already handled that Cons: –Over the same time period above, the DUC would have 50 metric tons of carbon emissions associated with this electricity generation. –Burning of coal also releases significant amounts of sulfur, which can lead to acid rain.

15. Renewable Energy Source Analysis

17. Breakdown of Office Electricity Usage by Activity Used power densities in LEED certification to find electricity usage of equipment and lighting Other usage inferred from percentages given by EIA

18. Graph of Electricity Consumption of Offices Compared to Total DUC Electricity Consumption

19. Breakdown of Office Energy Usage

20. Breakdown of Meeting Room Electricity Usage by Activity Used power densities in LEED certification to find electricity used for lighting Other usage inferred from percentages given by EIA There is a baseline of electricity consumption from cooling and ventilation

21. Graph of Electricity Consumption of Offices Compared to Total DUC Electricity Consumption

22. Breakdown of Meeting Room Energy Usage

23. Energy Breakdown in DUC Kitchen: Weekday According to national data, Energy use in restaurants and industrial kitchens can be divided into 5 categories, and energy is consumed in those areas in these proportions: We used real time DUC data on Natural gas usage to calculate overall DUC kitchen energy usage

24. Energy Breakdown in DUC Kitchen: Weekend Energy usage is much lower on the weekends than during the week. Peaks still occur at traditional meal times, but they aren’t as high.

25. Energy Breakdown by Space

26. Carbon Apportionment by Activity