daylighting design and sustainability
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
CoolDaylighting
Daylighting Design
CoolDaylighting
Why it’s a good idea
• Current Cost of Energy• Model Energy Codes• Productivity & Daylight• “Green Design going
Mainstream” • Market Differentiation for
“Green” Firms
CoolDaylighting
Governor Hull’s Executive Order
Governor requires energy efficiency in school construction
(PHOENIX - March 1, 2001) Governor Jane Dee Hull today committed Arizona to energy efficiency in new school construction and deficiencies corrections by issuing an executive order in consultation with the School Facilities Board. The board then adopted the policy during its meeting in Cave Creek today. "From today forward, the School Facilities Board will ensure that Arizona schools incorporate energy saving devices into their major repair and construction projects. This policy will save both energy and money over the long term," said Governor Hull. The School Facilities Board, which oversees the Students FIRST school construction and repair program, approved the new guideline endorsing efficient energy management at its meeting today. "The entire Students FIRST process is focused on using state resources wisely and well to meet the educational needs of Arizona's children. It is equally important that we use electricity wisely to meet the needs of all Arizonans. It is critical that we use our energy supplies wisely to avoid the economic harm we've seen in California," Hull said. Arizona has 228 school districts governing 1220 schools. Since most schools operate during peak energy usage hours, reductions in their usage could produce significant energy savings. "I know our schools are an excellent place to employ wise energy management. And I thank the members of the School Facilities Board for acting so quickly on this issue," the Governor said. The School Facilities Board can fund additional costs resulting from the installation of energy saving devices that provide a return on investment within eight years, but such devices will immediately save money in utility bills and maintenance costs over the long term, said Dr. Philip E. Geiger, executive director of the board. In her executive order, Hull said, ". . . (F)rom this day forward all public schools in the state of Arizona shall be designed and constructed in such a manner to reduce energy consumption and to create more energy efficient facilities without adversely affecting the quality of school design and construction by providing additional funds to school in accordance with School Facilities Board policies and guidelines to positively and expeditiously implement this order."
CoolDaylighting
Human Performance
• Up 20% increase in student performance
• Up to 50% reduction in absenteeism
• Rate of recovery increased in hospitals
• Conclusion: We are not indoor animals!
CoolDaylighting
Economic Performance
• Over 20 years, 94% of the cost of a building is in people
• Therefore a 1% gain in productivity is worth more than a 1% increase in sales
• 1% Gain in prod = $4/sf/year in an office building (more than energy costs)
• Reduce Maint and O&M costs
CoolDaylighting
Environmental Performance• 40% of energy used to heat
& cool buildings• An aggressive daylighting
strategy can reduce electrical loads by 30%+
• Reduce Use of Renewable Resources
• Thus, reduce a Myriad of Pollutants
CoolDaylighting
How:
• #1 is an Integrated Design Approach
• Reallocation of Construction Dollars from mechanical systems to daylighting systems.
CoolDaylighting
Fundamentals:
• High QUALITY footcandles. May mean a reduction in the amount of glass
• Use High Performance Glass• Protect Glass (Ground is the light shelf)
• Control Luminance Ratios
CoolDaylighting
The Prototypes
CoolDaylighting
Base Case12 2x4 Trouffers, (1.36 W/sf)
92 sf of tinted glass (SC=0.51)
9’0” Ceiling
CoolDaylighting
Prototype 1-112 2 Lamp 2x4 Trouffers with dimming ballasts (0.89 W/sf)
82 sf of hi-performance glass (SC=0.22)
9’0” Ceiling
LEVEL 2
36” overhang
One photosensor
CoolDaylighting
Prototype 1-212 2 Lamp 2x4 Trouffers with dimming ballasts (0.89 W/sf)
43 sf of 20” clerestory (SC=0.26 unshaded, SC=0.38 shaded)
48 sf of view windows
9’0” Ceiling
LEVEL 2
36” overhang
Two photosensors
CoolDaylighting
Prototype 1-348 lf of FineLite Series 4 w/ 6 Motorola 4-Lamp dimming ballasts (0.89 W/sf)57.4 sf of 20” clerestory (SC=0.26 unshaded, SC=0.38 shaded)59.5 sf of view windows10’6” CeilingPicture Mold at 8’0”LEVEL 240” overhangTwo photosensors
CoolDaylighting
Prototype 1-448 lf of FineLite Series 4 w/ 6 Motorola 4-Lamp dimming ballasts (0.89 W/sf)
57.4 sf of 20” clerestory (SC=0.26 unshaded, SC=0.38 shaded)
+ Additional 63sf of clerestory in a roof step
59.5 sf of view windows
10’6”+ Ceiling
Picture Mold at 8’0”
40” overhang on Clerestories
Two photosensors
CoolDaylighting
Model Floor Plan
CoolDaylighting
Model Elevation
CoolDaylighting
Model Section
CoolDaylighting
The Numbers• Modeling performed on the
Trane Trace 700 ProgramPrototype
North South West EastCFMpeak 756 1116 883 1,425CFM/sf 0.84 1.25 0.99 1.59AC Tons 3.16 3.36 3.56 3.61sf/Ton 284 267 252 248kW peak* 7.00 7.38 7.75 7.38$/Classrm-Yr** 1,088$ 1,126$ 1,137$ 1,119$
Base Case
PrototypeNorth South West East
CFMpeak 619 637 613 846CFM/sf 0.69 0.71 0.68 0.94AC Tons 2.81 2.89 2.94 2.87sf/Ton 319 310 304 312kW peak* 5.50 5.63 5.75 5.63$/Classrm-Yr** 742$ 751$ 750$ 746$
Prototype 1-3, level 2
CoolDaylighting
Prototype Comparison
230 198 200 190 204 178 180 70
$3
5,4
34 $
29
,51
6
$2
9,6
28
$2
6,6
02
$2
9,8
90 $
23
,88
2
$2
3,2
40
$1
2,1
82
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
Ba
se
Pro
to 1
-1
Pro
to 1
-2 L
eve
l 1
Pro
to 1
-2 L
eve
l 2
Pro
to 1
-3 L
eve
l 1
Pro
to 1
-3 L
eve
l 2
Pro
to 1
-4
Pro
to 1
-3 L
eve
l 2
$-
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000kWpeak*
Annual Cost
2-Story Module, 16 Classrooms
Centra
l Pla
nt
CoolDaylighting
Daylighting Worksheet
Daylighting WorksheetPrototype Comparison: Base Case vs Prototype 3, Level 216 classroom unit, 2 story, external circulation
BASE CASE
Space Number Tons Each Tons Total CFM Each CFM Total kW Each kW Total $/Year $/yr TotalNorth CRs 8 3.16 25.3 756 6,048 7.00 56.0 1,088$ 8,704$ South CRs 8 3.36 26.9 1116 8,928 7.38 59.0 1,126$ 9,008$
Totals 52.2 Tons 14,976 CFM 115.0 kW Peak 17,712$
Prototype 1-3, Level 2
Space Number Tons Each Tons Total CFM Each CFM Total kW Each kW Total $/Year $/yr TotalNorth CRs 8 2.81 22.5 619 4,952 5.50 44.0 742$ 5,936$ South CRs 8 2.89 23.1 637 5,096 5.63 45.0 751$ 6,008$
Totals 45.6 Tons 10,048 CFM 89.0 kW Peak 11,944$
Improvements: -14% reduction -33% reduction -23% reduction -33%
Savings: multizone system (@$2300/Ton) 15,088$ Additions: Glass ($137 * 16) 2,192$ 33% reduction in fan power Overhang ($100/lf x 32 lf x 8) 25,600$ =.33/0.50 x 0.33 x $1.15 x 14336 sf = 3,581$ Photosensors ($148 x 16) 2,368$
Roller Shades ($100 x 8) 800$
TOTAL SAVINGS 18,669$ TOTAL COST ADDERS 30,160$
Summary:For approx $11,491 (or $718 per classroom, less than $0.80/sf ) we have achieved a superior learning environment w/ increased efficiency.The building will save approximately $5,768 in operating costs alone the first year.
With a central plant estimated at approx. $4300/Ton and a 7 ton reduction, the same results will be achieved with a $3,521 SAVINGS
CoolDaylighting
Illuminance Calculations
CoolDaylighting
Illuminance CalculationsGraphic
CoolDaylighting
Illuminance Calculations Summary
CoolDaylighting
Strategies - Daylighting Section
CoolDaylighting
Capistrano Study Classroomsfrom Heschong & Mahone Report
CoolDaylighting
Summary
• Need and Opportunity Exists in schools AND workplaces
• Integrated/Synergistic Design is the key
• VE of the ‘system’ is not possible without compromising the results
• We CAN create better environments for people without significantly increasing first cost