Energy seminar march_28_final

Stanford’s Energy StoryPresent and Future

Sustainable Stanford: university-wide effort to reduce Stanford’s environmental impact and preserve resources through innovation and best practices.

innovation

The Initiative on Environment and Sustainability

Research ThemesStrategic Collaborations

Interdisciplinary Training

Institutional Practice of Sustainability

Leadership in Sustainability at Stanford

Stanford’s Sphere of Influence & Responsibility

Top Ten CleanTech Universities in the U.S. for 2010

“Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif. Stanford University is on the cutting edge of clean technology. Stanford has developed an ambitious, long-range, $250

million initiative to sharply reduce the university's energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. The university also has established a $100 million research institute, the Precourt Institute for Energy, to focus on

energy issues (see Stanford launches $100M energy research institute). More than $30 million in yearly funding is now spent on energy research at the

university. Stanford Technology Ventures Program (STVP) is the entrepreneurship center at Stanford's School of Engineering. STVP is

dedicated to accelerating high-technology entrepreneurship education and creating scholarly research on technology-based firms that, in turn, provides

new insights for students, scholars and business leaders. Notable cleantech spinouts: Amprius, Nanostellar, Rolith, D.light Design,

Driptech, and Veranda Solar”.

The Stanford Ecosystem

Infrastructure & Systems

Institutional & Individual Choices

Sustainable Stanford

innovation

Long Term Energy & Climate Plan

Infrastructure to Support Academic Mission Expansion for Campus GrowthSuccessor for Cardinal Cogen (2015)

Reduce Environmental Footprint Greenhouse Gas Emissions Declining Water SupplyImminent Regulations Sustainability Leadership

Economic ViabilityGas price increases & volatilityMonetization of carbon emissionsWater cost quadrupling

innovation

Energy and Climate Plan - Approach

Energy Efficiency in New Building Design

Require that new buildings be designed to use at least 30% less energy and 25% less water than standard buildings of the same typeBased on lifecycle cost analysis of energy demand on campus LEED Gold Equivalent

Jasper Ridge Field Station -2005 Recipient of the AIA/COTE Top Green Projects Award

Carnegie Global Ecology Research Center-2007 Recipient of the AIA/COTE Top Green Projects Award

Jerry Yang and Akiko Yamazaki Environment and Energy (Y2E2) Building

Stanford’s New Construction Standards

Science and Engineering Quad

Before:  149,000 GSF After:  545,000 GSF

Bio/Chem Engineering (2014)

Nano Technology Center (2011)

Science and Engineering Center (2010)

Environment and Energy Building (2008)

“In keeping with its curriculum, the vision for Y2E2 is that of

an icon sustainable building that does more than simply bring accolades to the campus.

Pushing the envelope of technology: itself designed and intended to be a teaching tool, the Y2E2 building will inspire students to take the next steps towards

a sustainable future.”

—Vision Statement Excerpt

Y2E2: Built to Conserve, Inspire & Teach

Utility Conservation Results

• Meets calibrated design goal to use 42% less energy than ASHRAE 90.1-2004

• 40%-50% less energy intense than equivalent Stanford buildings (mixed use office/ classroom / laboratory)

• Met design goal to use 90% less potable water than EPAct 2005

• Uses recycled water for flushing low-flow toilets and urinals

• Lake water irrigates native & adaptive landscape plantings

Energy Water

Seismic Design Guidelines (Feb 2003)

Project Cost and Efficiency Benchmarks (Sept 2003)

Guidelines for Lifecycle Cost Analysis (Oct 2005)

Revised in 2008

Lasting Impacts on Stanford Guidelines

Stanford Sustainability Guidelines (March 2002)

Project Delivery Process –“Heartbeat” (2001)

Revised in 2010

Board-approved, tried, tested, proven.

Understanding Performance is Key

Current Y2E2 energy consumption compared to energy code confirms the savings modeled during design.

Energy Conservation in Existing Buildings

Energy Consumption at Stanford

• 700 major buildings• 14.2 million SF• Annually consume about:

• 200 million kWh• 850 million lbs steam• 50 million ton-hrs CW

• About $60 million in energy costs

Heating9%

Cooling34%

Fans6%

Equipment23%

Lighting28%

Pumps0%

HeatingCoolingFansEquipmentLightingPumps

Typical Energy Consumption

Heating37%

Cooling24%

Fans18%

Equipment10%

Lighting5%

DHW5%

Pumps1%

HeatingCoolingFansEquipmentLightingDHWPumps

Office Building

Lab Building

Approach to Energy Efficiency in Existing Bldgs

• Technology Specific– Promote individual measures with broad application– Leverage multiple channels to implement measures

• Building Specific– Focus on specific project opportunities– Develop comprehensive solutions– Large investment opportunities

• Operational• Behavioral

Technology Specific Approach

• Types of efficiency measures– Lighting– High efficiency motors– LED exit signs– Motor drives– Window film– Refrigerator & Freezer replacements– Server room cooling upgrades– Centralized chilled water conversions– Room temperature sample storage

Technology Specific Approach Example

• Energy Retrofit Program– Started in 1993– $10 million in incentives– 330+ projects completed– Over 240 million kWh saved

• Over 1 year’s worth of total campus consumption

– Average project payback less than 4 years

Building Specific Approach

Top 200 Campus Energy Users – Sorted by Dollars

Building Specific Approach

• Types of projects– Lab ventilation control– Direct Digital Control upgrades– Humidification

Building Specific Approach Example

• Whole Building Energy Retrofit Program– Initiate 12 Building study in 2004– First project completed in 2006– 11 projects complete to-date

• Invested over $15 million• Qualified for $2.3 million in utility rebates• Saving $3 million in energy costs per year• Reduce campus energy consumption by 5%

– Additional $15 million budgeted for more buildings

Operational Approach

• Monitoring– Find excessive use

• Maintenance– Recommissioning

• Controls

ControlsControls – Air Handler Level

Controls – Zone Level

Controls – Zone Level

The Future of Energy Conservation

• Data management and analysis– Enable near real-time monitoring based

commissioning• Further control precision

– Enable individual zones to be virtually autonomous• Integrate building demand management with

supply management– Smarter scheduling– Automated demand reductions

Greening Energy Supply

Stanford can recover 65% of the heat now discharged from the cooling system to meet 80% of campus heating demands.

Summer

Winter

Spring& Fall

Why Heat Recovery is PossibleWe heat & cool buildings at the same timeCooling is just the collection of unwanted heat

Source: Stanford UniversityDraft Energy & Climate Plan (April 2009)

Heat Recovery

Heat Recovery

Heat Recovery

Waste Heat Being Discarded from Cardinal Cogeneration Plant

Heat Recovery Potential

Cooling

Heating

CEF Replacement Options

Options recommended fall into 2 categories:1. Import electricity from grid, or

2. Make electricity on-campus using natural gas

2.a. Cogeneration options

2.b. ‘Stand alone’ power/thermal generation options

“To Gas or Not To Gas” is biggest question:• Long term gas prices are prime variable controlling life cycle cost

• Other key cost variables include:Market electricity prices and spark spread to gas prices

GHG costs and application

PG&E “Exit Fees”

Long Term Gas Prices

Market Electricity Prices & Spark Spread

GHG Cost

Source: Energy Strategies, Inc- Stanford Energy Plan Peer Review (Mar 2009)

Family of Forecasts below

California Cap & Trade first year range set at $10/ton to

$40/ton

Important Secondary Considerations

Water supply

Energy Portfolio Diversity

Flexibility to Change

Environmental Impact & Sustainability Leadership

Impact to campus during transformation

SFPUC service began 1960Current Allocation = 3.03 mgd

Campus Irrigation

to LW

GUP measures

Energy Portfolio Diversity

Flexibility to Change

Environmental Impact

Changing in PhasesSource: Stanford University

Draft Energy & Climate Plan (April 2009)

Options Studied

1. Cardinal to 2020- Extend existing Cardinal Cogen plant to 2020 then implement Option 3-new Stanford owned and operated steam cogen plant.

2. 3P Cogen- Third Party owns and operates an on-campus gas fired cogeneration plant and sells electricity, steam, and chilled water services to the university.

3. Cogeneration (Steam or Hot water)- Stanford constructs, owns, and operates a gas fired cogeneration plant similar to the existing plant that does not incorporate heat recovery from the chilled water system. The Hot Water option includes conversion of campus steam distribution system to hot water for partial efficiency gains but does not include heat recovery.

4. Hygen (GT) - A cogeneration/heat recovery hybrid based on gas turbine technology that intertwines the power plant with the heat recovery plant for added efficiency, but which eliminates the modularity offered by the stand alone HR + GT option.

5. Hygen (IC) - A hybrid like #4 but using advanced gas fired reciprocating engines instead of a gas fired turbine.

6. HR + (GT or IC)- Heat recovery plant plus conversion of steam distribution system to hot water, with a stand-alone on-site gas fired power plant based on either gas turbine or reciprocating engine technology to supply electricity instead of importing it from the grid.

7. HR + GSHE- Heat Recovery Option 8 with an ‘open loop’ Ground Source Heat Exchange (GSHE) system to handle the excess winter heat and summer cooling loads that cannot be handled by heat recovery.

8. HR + DA- Stanford converts the steam distribution system to hot water and constructs, owns, and operates an electrically powered heat recovery plant that extracts and reuses waste heat from the chilled water system to provide hot water and chilled water services to the university. Electricity to power the plant and the rest of the campus is imported from the grid under Direct Access.

9. SHP- A Separate Heat & Power plant of gas boilers and electric chillers with imported power.

Options Levelized at Current Commodity Prices

Best on-site gas option

Best imported power option

Best on-site gas option

Best imported power option

A Closer Look at the Best Options

Includes $900 million for capital, fuel, and O&M for on-site gas fired power

plant over 35 years

$900 million is substantial…could it pay for a renewable electricity plant

for our power instead?

Cost of 100% On-Site PV for Power

On-site PV solar electricity is better as long as 30% federal grants are still available (extended through 2011)…but would require huge up-front

capital, 1,100 acres initially and grow to 1,500 acres by 2050

To Gas or Not To Gas?

The benefit of renewable power to the owner grows as gas and electricity prices rise over time

Gas and electricity prices likely to always rise faster than

general inflation over long term

Option Recommended: Not to Gas…but keep option open

HR + GSHE: Heat Recovery + Ground Source Heat ExchangeConvert steam distribution system to hot water

Convert ~125 buildings on steam loop

Locate new Heat Recovery Plant on west side of campus

Design & Prepare for, but defer, ‘Plug and Play’ IC power plant

option

Clean Close Old CEF Site for Future Core Campus Development

Seek to develop better long term electricity options than 100%

gas…

But closely monitor costs and be prepared to move to gas if

prudent

innovation

Long Term Energy & Climate Plan

Infrastructure to Support Academic Mission Expansion for Campus GrowthSuccessor for Cardinal Cogen (2015)

Reduce Environmental Footprint Greenhouse Gas Emissions Declining Water SupplyImminent Regulations Sustainability Leadership

Economic ViabilityGas price increases & volatilityMonetization of carbon emissionsWater cost quadrupling

Culture of Sustainability Institutional and Individual Behavior

5353

5%-10% reduction in energy use though behavioral programs with education and incentives. This could be higher with technology support.

Stanford Energy and Climate Plan – Solution Wedges

Building Level Behavioral Program (launched in 2010)

Start with diagnosis, provide building report card

Perform building audit and formulate easy and actionable to‐do tasks with savings information

Provide leadership and coordination assistance  Provide Incentives – rewards and recognitionTie results to Stanford’s emissions reduction 

initiativePerform payback analysis , and show sustained 

savings   Train students through CEE/ES 109 and Office of 

sustainabilityInform sustainability governance and guidelines  

CEE/ES 109 Greening Building and Behavior

Service learning class to produce student sustainability coordinators

Work with Office of Sustainability as staff to assist and coordinate with building managers with $500/quarter stipend

Upcoming rollouts: Sweet HallHaas Center for Public Service

This is a career step/try out for students

Building Level Sustainability Programs

14 buildings done 2 in progress91 candidates

If this makes sense, how should we scale?

0

50

100

150

200

250

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Ener

gy In

tens

ity (M

MB

tu/G

SF)

electricitysteamchilled watertotal

Conservation is constantly outpaced by growth, but we

stay ahead….

Energy intensity at Stanford is now less than it was in 2000Energy Consumption Trends

Sustainability Dashboard – Storey House

Huang and Nanoscale

Y2E2

Pushing the envelope of

technology: itself designed and

intended to be a teaching tool, the

Y2E2 building will inspire

students to take the next steps

towardsa sustainable

future.”—Vision Statement

Excerpt

ENERGY WATER WASTE

TRANSPORTATIONFood

Coming Soon at Y2E2

Real-time and high-resolution electricity metering and feedback to encourage action in dormitories.

Branch circuit meters and custom data logging software to power a web interface to show residents their power use and promotes energy-conscious living.

We Can Do Better

6262

Influencing Campus Culture

• Sustainable Endowment Institute Top Tier: 2007, 2009, and 2010• Sierra Magazine: 26th in 2009; 5th Place in 2010, • U.S. Green Building Council and Princeton Review: Guide to

Green Colleges 2010• Discovery Communications: Top 10 in 2009

Stanford’s Sphere of Influence & Responsibility

64

Thank you

Savings

Conservation

Environment

Equity & Society Economy Institutional & Individual Choices

Sustainability at Stanford

Office of SustainabilityInstitutionalizing Sustainability through Programs, Evaluations,

Education and Outreach

Evaluations & Reporting Behavioral Sustainability ProgramsCampus CampaignsCommunication & Publication  Academic Integration