using uesc to meet federal sustainability, efficiency and

Washington Gas

Using UESC to Meet Federal Sustainability, Efficiency and Renewable Energy Goals

USGBC 2007 Federal Summit

June 7, 2007

Presented by: Oanh Tran

2

Agenda

• Basics of Utility Energy Service Contracts (UESC)

• Overview of Washington Gas

• Washington Gas capabilities and offerings

• Case studies of Washington Gas UESC energy projects

• Provide resource information and documentation related to the GSA Areawide Contract and the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP)

3

Contact Information

Washington Gas • Oanh Tran, VP - Business Development

6862 Elm Street, Suite 300

McLean, VA 22101

Telephone: (240) 460-0055

Email: [email protected]

4

Utility Energy Service Contracts (UESC)

Washington Gas • Specific contracts allowing agencies to legally procure

comprehensive energy and water efficiency improvements and renewable projects from local utilities on a sole source basis.

• Projects can be financed out of energy and O&M savings or use appropriated funds.

• This type of contracting method offers agencies great flexibility in meeting the goals of EPACT 2005 and Executive Order 13423.

5

Enabling Legislation

Washington Gas • EPACT of 1992 established permanent authority for UESC

(42 USC 8256)

• Also authorized and encouraged agencies to participate in utility programs, accept incentives, goods and services and to negotiate with utilities to design special programs addressing unique needs of agencies’ facilities.

• For DoD facilities – National Defense Authorization Act for 2007 allows DoD agencies to consider projects that have longer than 10-year term (10 USC 2911 – 2918)

• FAR Part 41 covers the use of GSA Area Wide Contracts for the purchase of all utility services, including energy management services.

• http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/financing/uescs_legislation.html

6

Rate of Investment

Washington Gas • Total capital investment for awarded projects between

1994 and May 2007: approximately $1.8 Billion

Fiscal Year 2004 Total: $108 Million

Fiscal Year 2005 Total: $103 Million

• Based on voluntary reporting from utilities and agencies

7

UESC Rate of Investment

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

$1,600

$1,800

$2,000

Jan-

93

Jan-

94

Jan-

95

Jan-

96

Jan-

97

Jan-

98

Jan-

99

Jan-

00

Jan-

01

Jan-

02

Jan-

03

Jan-

04

Jan-

05

Jan-

06

Jan-

07

Award Date

$Milli

on

TotalCapitalInvestment

PrivateSectorInvestment

FederalSectorInvestment

Notes: SOURCE (DOE FEMP)Investment is based on projects' capital cost.Data was last edited on May 2006 and is subject to change...

8

Agency Activity -- Total UESC Investment

All Other2%

GSA8%

VA6%

HHS4%

USPS3%

DOE3%

Air Force15%

Marine Corp9%

Army16%

Navy34%

9

Why Do UESC with Utilities?

Washington Gas • Long-term Partnership with a known entity

Local Utility may already be familiar with your facilities

Local Utility has unique expertise

• It’s an Established Source - Contracting is simplified through GSA Area Wide Contract

Faster process

• Flexibility in scope and size - No project is too small or too large!

Negotiated process

• It’s a mutually beneficial Partnership!

10

Typical UESC Offerings

Washington Gas • Energy Audits

• Feasibility Studies

• Engineering and Design

• Construction and Installation

• Performance Guarantees

• Training

• O & M Services

• Project Management

• Project Financing

• Metering

• Commissioning

11

UESC Sample Scope

Washington Gas

• HVAC Improvements

• Boiler and Chiller Improvements

• Building Envelope Improvements

• Building Automation & Energy Management Control Systems

• Lighting Improvements and Lighting Controls

• Chilled/Hot Water & Steam Distribution Systems

• Motors and Drives

• Cogeneration / Distributed Generation

• Renewable Energy Systems

• Energy and Utility Distribution Systems

• Water Management and Conservation Systems

• Electrical Systems (Transformers, Switchgears, Generators)

• Energy-Related Process Improvements

12

UESC Other Considerations

Washington Gas • Contracting process is NOT rigid

• UESC may not be available to all facilities

• Utility may be new to this type of contracting

• Your relationship with the Utility

13

UESC Process

Washington Gas

• Step 1 – Preliminary Energy Audit

• Step 2 – Detailed Feasibility Study

• Step 3 – Engineering and Design

• Step 4 – Construction and Installation

14

Overview of Washington Gas

Washington Gas

Installed one of the largest cogeneration projects in Washington, DC for the General Services Administration and the Smithsonian Institution

• Washington Gas UESC Track Record:

Completed well over 1,000 energy efficiency projects since 1984 ranging in size from less than $100,000 to over $64 millionSpecializing in renovation and modernization of building mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems resulting in energy and cost efficient operations

• One of the oldest gas utilities in US, serving more than 1,000,000 customers in DC, MD, and VA

• Strong supporter of energy efficiency and renewable energy

• Chartered by the US Congress in 1848

• Top 100 Most Ethical Companies (3 years consecutively)

15

Broad Range of Capabilities

Washington Gas • Washington Gas

Regulated natural gas sales and delivery service, energy management services

• Subsidiaries

Washington Gas Energy Systems, Inc. – Turnkey, design/ build, program management services for facility mechanical, electrical, plumbing and control systems

Washington Gas Energy Services, Inc. – Competitive supplier of natural gas, electricity (including wind-generated power), and commodity risk management services

16

WGES – Renewable Energy

Washington Gas • Washington Gas Energy Services

Leader in providing renewable energy in the DC area (wind power and biomass) to the US Army, universities, local counties and commercial clients

Supported the first 66 MW wind farm in West VA

Has provided 5% wind energy from the PJM grid (equivalent to output from 14-15 turbines annually)

Increasingly provides renewable energy credits (RECs) for green power

Supports local counties who buy renewable energy for LEED certification

Supplies incentives to support purchase of “local”renewable energy through “Clean Energy Reward Program”

17

Energy Services Capabilities

EnergyHVAC Systems (Chillers, Boilers)Cooling Towers/Condenser WaterDedicated Outdoor Air SystemsChilled Water SystemsSteam SystemsLighting and Lighting ControlsElectrical Distribution SystemsEMS ControlsMetering and SubmeteringSolar SystemsGeothermal SystemsCogenerationRadiant Heating and CoolingHeating and Cooling Recovery System

Domestic Water Reduction

Reduced Flow Plumbing Fixture

Engineering ServicesEnergy AuditsFeasibility StudiesCondition AssessmentsDesign BuildCommissioning

Non Domestic Water ReductionSteam SterilizersVacuum PumpsAir CompressorsFilm ProcessorsFood Service EquipmentRefrigeration Equipment

Water ReuseReverser Osmosis UnitsStillsWater for InjectionAir Handling Unit CondensateCooling Tower Blow-Down

Selected Project Case Studies

Washington Gas

19

PROJECT CASE STUDY

• New refrigeration equipment meets the chilled water needs of eight Smithsonian Institution museums located along the National Mall.

• Project reduces the plant's electric costs while generating surplus electricity for sale to the grid.

• Reduced emissions improve regional air quality.

• New chillers will replace the ozone-depleting refrigerant currently in use at the GSA and Smithsonian facilities.

The Castle

Freer Gallery of Art

South Quadrangle Building

Arts and Industries Building

Hirshhorn Museum

National Air and Space Museum

National Museum of the American Indian

Washington Gas recently completed a $64 million cogeneration project at the GSA Central Heating and Cooling Plant in Washington D.C.

U.S. General Services Administration Cogeneration Project

21

PROJECT CASE STUDY

• New cooling towers & auxiliary equipment

• Retrofitted an existing boiler into a waste-heat boiler

• Automated plant control system

• New electrical switchgear

• Two 5MW gas turbines & gas compressors

• 2 miles of piping including 1 mile underground distribution piping serving 8 Smithsonian buildings


EQUIPMENT INSTALLED INCLUDES:

• 17,000 tons of cooling equipment including two steam-driven chillers

22

• Migration to a cleaner burning fuel to generate electricity

• Full self-generating power capability

• Re-use of existing facility

• Full utilization of existing plant personnel

• Greater redundancy & operational flexibility

• Project pays for itself within 8 years through energy savings


PROJECT CASE STUDY

PROJECT BENEFITS:

• Updated cooling equipment with an estimated 30 year life expectancy

23

Patuxent River Naval Air Station PROJECT CASE STUDY

Washington Gas conducted a feasibility study to decentralize the Central Heating Plant for the Patuxent River Naval Air Station in 1997.

Individual heating systems were installed in approximately 47 buildings with a 4-year payback due to the cost avoidance to replace the entire base distribution system.

24

Bureau of Engraving and Printing PROJECT CASE STUDY

Washington Gas installed four 1375-ton chillers, upgraded chilled water plant, four cooling towers, a plate & frame heat exchanger for “free cooling”, and automated controls for the new chiller plant at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing.

25

National Institutes of Health PROJECT CASE STUDY

Washington Gas installed over 22,000 energy efficient lighting fixtures, water conservation and water-related measures including reverse osmosis system and domestic water savings in main hospital. Eight solar roofing and siding systems and ground mounted systems were also installed throughout the main campus in Bethesda, MD.

26

St Elizabeth’s Hospital PROJECT CASE STUDY

Washington Gas provided mechanical, electrical, and plumbing related upgrades to address system deficiencies at JHP Building #122 and RMB Building #124.

Washington Gas installed an Energy Management Control System.

Washington Gas performed an energy-related building envelope renovation for the William A. White Building on East Campus. DC Department of Mental Health

27

UESC Useful Sources

• Office of Public Utilities – Lindsey Lee, Contracting Officer (202) 708-9881 [email protected]

• Utility Areawide User’s Manual –www.gsa.gov/pbs/centers/energy/utility.htm

• Procuring Energy Management Services with the Areawide Contract –www.gsa.gov/pbs/centers/utility.htm

• GSA Water Management Guide –www.gsa.gov/pbs/centers/energy/utility.htm

• DOE FEMP – David McAndrew (202) 586-7722 [email protected]://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/financing/uescs.html

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.gsa.gov/pbs/centers/energy/utility.htm

http://www.gsa.gov/pbs/centers/energy/utility.htm

http://www.gsa.gov/pbs/centers/utility.htm

Questions and Discussion

Washington Gas

June 7, 2007U.S. Green Building Council Federal Summit 2007

Performance ContractingPerformance Contracting

Britta MacIntoshVice President, Business Development

NORESCO

Mark WagnerVice President, Government Relations

Johnson Controls, Inc


Executive Order 13423Executive Order 13423

Ensure that

i. New construction and major renovation of agency buildings comply with the Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings set forth in the federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings Memorandum of Understanding (2006), and

ii. 15 percent of the existing Federal capital asset building inventory of the agency as of the end of fiscal year 2015 incorporates the sustainable practices in the Guiding Principles


EO 13423 GuidanceEO 13423 GuidanceA. Objectives

Each agency shall pursue the following objectives regarding high performance buildings:

• Reduction in life-cycle cost of facilities’ environmental and energy attributes.

• Improvement in energy efficiency, water conservation, and utilization of renewable energy.

• Provision of safe, healthy, and productive built environments.• Promotion of sustainable environmental stewardship

To accomplish these objectives, each agency shall locate, design, construct, maintain, and operate its buildings and facilities in a resource-efficient, sustainable, and economically viable manner, consistent with its mission.


EO 13423 GuidanceEO 13423 Guidance

B. RequirementsNew construction and renovation. Beginning with the FY 2007 funding cycle, when planning the funding and design for construction of buildings that meet the agency-defined capital asset threshold, each agency shall meet or exceed statutory goals and address each of the five Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings (Guiding Principles)


Memorandum of Understanding Memorandum of Understanding ––5 Guiding Principles5 Guiding Principles

I. Employ Integrated Design PrinciplesIntegrated Design

Use a collaborative, integrated planning and design process.

CommissioningEmploy total building commissioning practices tailored to the size and complexity of the building and its system components in order to verify performance.



2. Optimize Energy PerformanceEnergy Efficiency• Reduce new construction energy consumption to 30%

below ASHRAE 90.1• Reduce renovation energy consumption by 20% from

2003 levelMeasurement and Verification• Install building level metering and track system

performance• Use EnergyStar benchmarking tools for new buildings,

submit data to High Performance Buildings Database



3. Protect and Conserve WaterIndoor Water

Use a minimum of 20 percent less potable water than the indoor water use baseline calculated for the building

Outdoor WaterReduce outdoor potable water consumption by a minimum of 50 percent over that consumed by conventional means



4. Enhance Indoor Environmental QualityVentilation and Thermal ComfortMoisture ControlDaylightingLow-Emitting MaterialsProtect Indoor Air Quality during Construction



5. Reduce Environmental Impact of MaterialsRecycled ContentBiobased ContentConstruction WasteOzone Depleting Compounds


OMBOMB’’s New Energy Scorecardss New Energy Scorecards

• Based upon President’s Management Agenda (PMA) scorecard– New scorecards for Energy Efficiency, Transportation &

Environment– Agencies are graded twice a year

• Simple but effectiveRED RED YELLOW YELLOW GREENGREEN

• “Standards for Success”– Reduction in energy usage– Use of renewable energy– New building design– Metering of facilities


DilemmaDilemma

QUESTION

How to you meet your new energy goals and get green on your scorecard without additional resources?

ANSWER

Develop Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC) or Utility Energy Savings Contracts (UESC) which save energy and can

guarantee that the project costs are paid from savings.


Accomplishing the goals using Accomplishing the goals using Energy Savings Performance ContractingEnergy Savings Performance Contracting

• EO 13423 encourages:– Reduction in LCC of facilities– Improvement in efficiency, environmental and energy

attributes– Water Conservation– Use of renewables– Promotion of Sustainable Environmental Stewardship

ESPC can do all of this for your facility


Energy Savings Performance Contracting Energy Savings Performance Contracting -- ESPCESPC

• Private Sector designs, finances and installs energy efficient upgrades to federal facilities, including military bases– New efficient lighting, boilers, chillers, energy management

systems, co-generation plants, renewable energy systems, and more

• Results are guaranteed by contractor

• Project costs are required to be paid from energy savings

• Rigorous Measurement and Verification requirement ensures savings are real


Energy Bill

O&M Costs

Energy Bill

O&M Costs

Energy

Cost

Savings

Energy Bill

O&M Costs

1. Before ESPC

2. During ESPC

3. AfterESPC

Contractor Payment

Govt Savings

Government

Savings

• Before ESPC: Funds are wasted on energy and O&M costs• During ESPC:

– Private Sector finances, installs and maintains new energy efficient equipment, at no upfront cost to government

– Energy $avings are guaranteed by contractor– Government pays off investment with $avings on utility bill

• After ESPC: Government keeps the savings after investment is paid off

How ESPCs WorkHow ESPCs Work


The ESPC ProcessThe ESPC Process

• Project Development• Engineering and Design• Installation and Construction• Commissioning, Training and Acceptance• Measurement and Verification• Operations and Maintenance


History of ESPCHistory of ESPC

• Over 300 projects throughout the federal government– Over $1.8 billion in private sector investment

• Energy savings– 14.4 trillion Btu annually– The energy consumed by 143,000 households or a city of a half

million

• Dollar Savings$5.0 Billion Total

– $3.5 Billion Investment payback$1.5 Billion Net savings to government


Support for ESPCSupport for ESPC

Congress reauthorized the ESPC program until 2016 under EPAct 2005

“These contracts provide agencies with important opportunities to improve energy efficiency at the thousands of Federal buildings across our country. I encourage government officials to utilize ESPCs to meet their energy reduction goals.”

President Bush, August 3, 2006

“The Committee urges the Department of Defense to utilize Energy Savings Performance Contracting whenever possible to upgrade facilities and retain base operating funding.”

Senate Report on Defense Appropriations FY 2007July 25, 2006 (SR 109-292)


Bottom LineBottom Line

Achievement of Executive Order– Guaranteed energy savings– On-site renewable energy projects– Water conservation measures can be included– Help meet sustainability goals for buildings– Metering requirements can be met– Doesn’t cost any more than if you didn’t do anything


Bottom LineBottom Line

Direct Benefits– Energy security can be enhanced– Indoor environments / quality of life can be improved– Achievement of Executive Orders reduce energy and associated

costs – No capital investment by the customer to achieve guaranteed

savings – Leverage energy and O&M savings for major infrastructure

improvements– Long term guarantee of equipment and system performance– Operational Savings - Maintenance, Repairs, and Replacements– Significant positive impact on environment– Encourages integrated design and a comprehensive approach


Project ExamplesProject Examples

• U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba• Navy Region Southwest, CA• National Geographic Society, DC• State of Maryland• Mounds View Public Schools and Elk River Area

Schools, MN


Facility Type: Naval BaseFacility Size: 5,412,267 sq. ft.Type of Contract: Navy Caribbean ESPCTerm of Contract: 12 & 14 yearsTotal Capital Cost: $26,000,000Total Annual Savings: $3,200,000Technologies:• Wind turbines installed and integrated into

electrical grid. This 3.8 MW project will reduce toxic emissions by over 13,000,000 lbs per year

• Higher efficiency diesel generators (7.2 MW) installed for central power plant. Substantial electrical grid improvements also being made to ensure reliability and support increase of mission.

• Energy efficient lighting and water conservation in over 850 family housing units and 100 commercial buildings.

U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

ESPC Project Case StudyESPC Project Case StudyNORESCONORESCO

Reference:Bev Wade, (757) 847-7962

2006 Renewable Energy Project Award Winner


Facility Type: Navy BaseFacility Size: 9,500,000 sq. ft.Type of Contract: DOE West ESPCTerm of Contract: All DO’s 10 Years or LessTotal Capital Cost: $33,217,000Total Annual Savings: $5,085,000Technologies:• 750 kW solar PV parking structure and 30 kW roof PV array• Two 60 kW microturbines w/ heat recovery heat

exchangers• Energy efficient lighting; daylighting and control system • Controls conversion to DDC connected to Area-Wide EMCS• Irrigation centralized control system; upgrade and

expansion of the existing underground irrigation system • HVAC system upgrades• Major improvements to compressed air plants and systems • 5 MW steam turbine generator

Navy Region SouthwestCalifornia

ESPC Project Case StudyESPC Project Case StudyNORESCONORESCO

Reference:John Thomas, (619) 556-7989

Project of the Year


• Building upgrades included– Replacement of chillers, boilers and air-handling systems– Energy-efficient lighting– Upgrades building management system controls– Energy management paging system monitoring equipment, temperature,

and humidity– Water conservation

• Generated 8 to 11 percent savings in energy costs and reduced annual electrical costs by approximately $300,000

• Society’s headquarters complex in DC became first facility to achieve LEED for Existing Buildings certification in 2003

• $7 million infrastructure upgrade increased value of facilities by $24 million

National Geographic SocietyNational Geographic SocietyJohnson Controls, IncJohnson Controls, Inc


• Three Executive Orders– Goals for clean energy procurement, energy

efficiency, and water conservation– Initiated green buildings program and task force on

energy conservation and efficiency• Multiple performance contracts include

construction, equipment upgrades, lighting retrofits, water conservation measures, metering, installation of energy management systems.

• Taking the “LEED”– Maryland’s new High Efficiency Green Buildings Program requires

eligible buildings constructed by the State meet or exceed the USGBC LEED rating of silver

– Maryland is first state to sign up for and be accepted into the LEED for Existing Buildings pilot program

State of MarylandState of MarylandJohnson Controls, IncJohnson Controls, Inc


Recommendations for ESPCRecommendations for ESPC

1. Promote ESPC projects at your agency sites– Ask: “Where haven’t we done projects and why not?”

2. Encourage renewable energy conservation measures (solar, wind & biomass)

– Need to work hard to make renewables life cycle cost effective

3. Include Water conservation measures in projects– Can be extremely life cycle cost effective

4. Develop larger ESPCs– Average project currently $5-10 million

5. Leverage the requirements and guidance for positive environmental results

USGBC USGBC Current Initiative:Current Initiative:ResearchResearch

Comparative Analysis Comparative Analysis of Federal Green of Federal Green Building Research Building Research FundingFunding

USGBC Federal Summit June 7, 2007USGBC Federal Summit June 7, 2007

USGBC 2004 Strategic Plan

• The USGBC will be both a resourcefor existing knowledge about the built environment and a driver of relevant research.

First Step: Assess Current ActivityAssess green building research

funding: • against other federal R&D

budgets• by research area (e.g. energy)• by funding organization• against environmental, health

and economic impact of buildings

ScopeIncluded:• Environmental• Technical• Social• Business/economic• Technology transfer• Organizations funding >

$1 M/year• Building & site scale

Not included:• Private, proprietary self

funded research• Security & disasters• Basic science• Urban planning,

transportation• International• Education, technical

assistance, implementation

Research Funding: Federal Government

Relevant Federal Organizations• U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)• National Science Foundation (NSF)• U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)• U.S. General Services Administration (GSA)• National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)• U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)

• (U.S. Department of Education)• (National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS))

Annual Green Building Research Funding by Organization, Three Year Average (2003-2005)

2,4003,0005,0005,8007,500

123,170

25,31722,940 11,100

020,00040,00060,00080,000

100,000120,000140,000

DOE (2.5%

)

EPA (gran

ts on

ly)* 3

.2%NSF (0

.7%)

PIER (27%

)DOC-N

IST (1.5%

)NYSERDAHUD (3

.6%)

GSAASHRAE (6

5%)

Agency

Thou

sand

s of

Dol

lars

Green Building Research by Topic, 2002-2005

Research Topics in Energy

• Photovoltaics• Cogeneration• Solid state lighting• Daylighting• Energy efficient lighting• Demand response technologies• Commissioning and retrocommissioning• Building information modeling• Controls and management systems• Mechanical and ventilation systems

Research Topics in Wood

• Wood products• Concrete• Steel• Glazing and windows• Bio-based materials

Topics in Indoor Environmental Quality

• Particulate matter and air quality • Diseases and health impacts related to air

quality• Building materials’ emissions• Mold and moisture management • Effective vacuuming and cleaning methods• Air quality testing and monitoring methods• Lead

Topics in Sites and Water

• Lawn care/pesticides • Natural stormwater management

practices, including green roofs

Technology Transfer Topics

• Software development for improving energy efficiency

• Some specific building type- and location-specific resources and design guides

• (Curriculum development)• (Case studies, prototypes)

U.S. Department of EnergyGreen Building Funding by Research Topic, 2002-2004

U.S. Department of Energy

Other R&D: 97.4%

Building R&D: 2.6%2.3% without embodied energy researchDOE Research

Funding Allocations

B

,

U.S. Primary Energy Use

Other: 60%

Buildings: 40%Does not includes embodied energy

U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyGreen Building Funding by Research Topic, 2002-2006

EPA: to “protect human health and the environment”

Goals:• Clean Air and Global

Climate Change • Clean and Safe Water • Land Preservation and

Restoration• Healthy Communities and

Ecosystems• Compliance and

Environmental Stewardship

Other Research, 95.78%

Green Building Research, 4.22%

National Science Foundation

90

13,430

6,070

20,990

380

51,010

5,210

50

3,590

470

930

2,840

40

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000

Other IEQ issues

Air quality & related health issues

Resource efficiency

Building materials

Other atmosphere issues

Renewable energy

Energy efficiency

Water efficiency

Other site issues

Stormwater management

General green building issues

Development of resources & curricula

Develop codes, standards & metrics

Thousands of Dollars

Green Building Funding by Research Topic, 2002-2005

`

• Created to “…to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare…”

Other R&D: 99.3%

Building R&D: 0.7%

National Science Foundation

Other: 91%

Building Construction: 9%

NSF Research Funding Allocations

U.S. GDP

Federal Support for Green Building Research is Worthwhile

• Climate change and other health and environmental problems are national issues

• UNEP: changes in building design can support significant cuts in greenhouse gas emissions

• Research yields significant economic benefits

Conclusion: Funding Level is not Commensurate to Size of Industry and

Impact on Health, Economy, Environment

• 0.2% of Federal research dollars• Federal R&D investment is just 0.02% of

total construction $• 9% of GDP ($1 trillion/year)

Research Committee Members• Appointed:

– Rich Haut Houston Advanced Research Center– Bruce Hunn ASHRAE– Vivian Loftness Carnegie Mellon University– Steve Selkowitz Lawrence Berkeley Lab– Alex Wilson BuildingGreen, Inc.

• Elected:– Gail Brager UC Berkeley– Dru Crawley US Department of Energy– John Fernandez MIT– Judith Heerwagen Heerwagen & Associates– Michael Holtz Architectural Energy Corporation– Peter Morris Davis Langdon Associates

USGBC Staff & Liaisons• Staff

– Peter Templeton Vice President for Education & Research– Tom Dietsche Research Program Manager– Mara Baum USGBC 2006 Ginsberg Fellow

• Liaisons– Ken Sandler USEPA Green Building Workgroup– Jeff Levine AIA, Resource Architect for Sustainability– Ben Ware Syracuse University, VP for Research

Access the full report

• USGBC Resources Research

• http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=78&

using uesc to meet federal sustainability, efficiency and

Documents