The Climate Change Action Plan

 

 

 

We might win a Battle,

but can we win the War?

 

 

Energy Conservation in Non-Residential Buildings

International Energy Studies, Inc.

 

 

Extended Abstract

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

President Clinton's Climate Change Action Plan meets the twin challenge of responding to the threat of global warming and strengthening the economy [1]. This paper tries to identify potential hurdles which might make the plan fail. Although, the plan covers energy consumption as a whole, we focus on energy conservation efforts in non-residential buildings; particularly in cooling.

 

Problems:

From our experience as consultant engineers and energy researchers we see the biggest hurdle to overcome as being the price of energy. As long as energy prices do not cover, at least in part, the cost of curing the environmental damages caused by the energy consumed, we will not see many changes in the future. At the present situation, low energy cost makes the implementation of most of the energy conserving technologies unattractive. The low cost of energy artificially inflates pay-back times for energy conserving measures to, from the monetary point of view, unacceptable ranges.

Besides the price of energy, there are three insufficiencies responsible for the current dilemma: lack of vision, lack of education, and lack of interest.

The lack of vision results in short-term thinking in the corporate world and in politics. This short-term interest in quarterly profits or four-year election periods inhibits the long-term research necessary in understanding a problem and finding the adequate measures to fix it. Federal funding in research is based on an even shorter time frame. Congress reviews research funding on an annual basis. The latest victim of such a congressional review process is the Superconducting Super Collider. Former Secretary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary, writes in LBL's Currents [2]:

The abrupt termination of the super collider adds to a long list of large international projects that the United States has suddenly and unilaterally killed or drastically altered, ... This embarrassing legacy raises serious questions about the reliability of the United States in international research projects.

Unfortunately, it is not only the big international projects which are being reviewed and drastically altered, but all federal research which is based on annual commitments.

It should be mentioned that even the Climate Change Action Plan is not a long-term research commitment, but a plan of implementation.

The lack of education is based on a system which does not provide the types of job training crucial for applied engineering i.e., schools which teach "building physics" or "building services engineering" and apprenticeship programs in industry. The necessary process of integrating different disciplines into a successful team is also not being taught or practiced. Architects who focus on design and have no interest in energy conservation teach architectural students. "Building systems" is usually taught in the mechanical engineering department; often by faculty who would rather not be involved in application. Research is scattered all over the place. There is no institution featuring integrated buildings/systems research in the U.S.

The lack of interest has a number of causes. First, at the current low energy prices there is no added-value attached to energy conservation. Second, the design engineers would have to work more for the same consulting fee. Third, designers as well as contractors prefer to propose systems they are familiar with to reduce work load and avoid legal consequences.

Furthermore, ignorance of foreign languages makes it difficult to learn from others. Another problem is that the U.S. is the only industrialized country still working with the outdated IP (inch/pound) unit system. Universities still teach in IP units, which makes smooth transition almost impossible.

American car manufacturers are faced with stiff competition from their Japanese counterparts and are facing challenging legislature in California and in the North-East. While the Big Three believed for a long time that only they knew what Americans expect from a car, the Japanese were selling the cars the American people really wanted.

Only the fear of being forced to provide the North-East with electric cars made the car manufacturers come forward with a proposal to implement more stringent exhaust emission practices than currently required.

Unfortunately in the buildings and systems market there is no foreign competition which could aid in making a fast transition from the current Energy Hogs to buildings and systems which use minimum energy for conditioning.

In order to reach the ambitious goals set by the Clinton administration, changes have to be implemented.

 

Examples:

The greatest obstacle in overcoming resistance to implementing energy efficiency is low cost for energy consumption and peak-power demand, which favors the design of "cheap" systems. First-cost is the reason that thousands of fan coil units are equipped with low-efficient fans (approximately 20% efficiency), HVAC packaged units contain direct expansion chillers with atrocious efficiency, large chillers with high peak-load COPs (Coefficient of Performance) are integrated in systems that they have to run most of the time in part-load (with terrible COPs), compression chillers are specified where alternative cooling sources with high COP are available and ducted air is used as the transport medium for energy although energy transport by water in pipes is 20 times more efficient.

When talking to mechanical engineers one learns that they "are being paid to be fast, not smart". As long as this is the attitude of American engineers, builders and architects, we are not going to see the changes required in solving the problems outlined by the President.

To avoid legal consequences, equipment is commonly oversized (e.g., cooling equipment is sized for unreasonable internal loads and to be capable of handling peak loads of all zones at the same time) and thus increases the number of part-load hours. Because of poor systems design, the myth has arisen that occupants need to experience "air movement" to feel comfortable. The lack of understanding of the physical principles of heat exchange between a human body and its environment costs the U.S. millions of dollars each year in unnecessary fan power.

A critical review of building designs awarded by ASHRAE for energy efficiency revealed that most of them would not pass building energy regulations in other countries.

 

Challenges:

Although the U.S. has the highest energy consumption per capita in the world, the buildup of greenhouse gases will be determined by the use of energy in the underdeveloped countries, particularly China, with 20% of the world population.

The rapid development of China and other countries of the Pacific Rim, as well as of Eastern Europe, will increase the air pollution and the emission of greenhouse gases dramatically.

It is, however, not only important to reduce pollution levels at the energy production site but also to help these countries implement energy standards which are beyond the current U.S. level. In order to prevent atmospheric pollution overkill, we can only hope that developing countries do not adopt current U.S. building practice and building equipment.

Unfortunately, the skylines of the Chinese "Special Economical Zones" already look more like Manhattan than Beijing. With increases of more than 12% in GNP for 1992 (1.3% for Japan) China's energy needs for industry, transport and buildings will sky-rocket.

 

Opportunities:

The Climate Change Action Plan and the booming economies of some of the developing countries should be seen as an opportunity to:

· increase efficiency and decrease emission levels for all three energy intensive areas: industry, transport and buildings

· promote the export of new energy efficient products to help developing countries increase their standard of living while increasing their energy consumption by a minimum.

In the current situation there is an opportunity to reduce pollution in the U.S., limit oil-dependency on foreign countries and stimulate exports (and create jobs) by increasing the competitiveness of American products, which, in turn, will help to limit greenhouse gas emissions world wide.

We believe, that many energy conserving measures are relatively easy to implement and make sense in economic terms. To make the most of the opportunity, research directions in private industry and governmental laboratories must be corrected.

 

Solutions:

In order to overcome the above problems, incentives are needed to encourage adoption of new technologies e.g., stricter energy laws and higher energy prices for demand and consumption, but higher utility rebates. Of course, stricter energy laws are not very popular with the public and the building community. This was also true in Switzerland, where stringent energy codes were implemented in 1986. A Swiss HVAC designer (and IES Consultant), states the following in his ASHRAE paper [3]:

Since 1986 a new energy law has been in effect in the city and the canton of Zurich, which has resulted in far-reaching changes in building planning. Its object is to promote energy conservation, to further the use of renewable energy, to reduce dependency on certain energy sources and to promote the supply of those energy types which are both economical and safe for the environment.

After surviving the first shock, an increasing number of engineers, architects and planners tried to come to grips with the new challenge. Most of them realized they would grow with the task and that the innovation, which was forced on them, would work to their advantage. Needless to say highly motivated building owners were required for the first buildings which utilized advanced HVAC systems.

Following are some of the opportunities available for increasing the energy efficiency of our current and future building stock:

· Building Shell: Insulation levels, thermal mass and window performance are below international accepted standards. The use of materials with high insulation values, vented facades, Low-E windows and shading devices can help to reduce the peak-load and energy consumption (cooling energy consumption penalties for the shoulder seasons can be minimized by economizer use).

· Office Equipment: It is common practice to cool office equipment by means of convection. Heated exhaust from the equipment is blown into the conditioned space. In addition to the effort to reduce the electrical consumption of office equipment by introducing sleeper modes with short warm-up times, larger equipment should be equipped with direct exhaust systems.

· Lighting: Architectural design should maximize the use of daylight in order to reduce electricity consumption in a building. Building plans should provide a minimum of core zones. Electrical lighting equipment has probably the highest efficiency level of all building components. The implementation of T8-lamps with electronic ballasts means that the efficiency of electric lighting is well ahead of all other building components. Vented luminaries reduce peak-power and the consumption of energy for cooling.

· HVAC (Thermal Energy Distribution): Making use of high-efficient equipment includes separating ventilation and thermal conditioning. Air for ventilation purposes only should be provided. Energy for thermal conditioning should be transported by water in pipes. This measure not only increases indoor air quality, but also reduces transport energy (fans and pumps) by approximately 75%. Supply and return air should be ducted to reduce short-circuiting and to control the point of exhaust. Ducts necessary to transport ventilation air should be equipped with exterior insulation.

· HVAC (Fans and Pumps): Fans and pumps should be designed and sized for highest possible performance (>70%). If variable loads have to be handled e.g., for thermal conditioning, motors should be equipped with variable speed drives.

· HVAC (Compressor Chiller): Only chillers with high COPs (COP > 5.0 [0.7 kW/ton]) should be used. Peak-power capacity should be split between at least two chillers (40%+60%) to increase part-load performance and to provide redundancy. Short-term storage should also be applied to increase chiller performance still further.

· HVAC (Absorption Chiller): Using high performance chillers developed in the U.S. or solar assisted absorption chillers, there is a "high cooling power alternative" available for the dominant compressor chiller.

· HVAC (Alternative Cooling Sources): Use of alternative cooling sources should be mandatory. Cooling towers, heat exchange with low temperature night air, ground coupling and desiccant cooling should be applied as fully as possible.

· HVAC (Cooling Application): Cooling with high temperature cooling levels should be promoted. Radiant cooling works at coolant temperature levels in the range of 16oC - 18oC (62oF - 66oF); approximately 5K (10oF) higher than conventional systems. At this temperature level, many of the alternative cooling sources can be applied without the need of mechanical cooling.

· Structure (Thermal Mass): With Phase Change Material (PCM) imbedded in wallboard thermal storage becomes available. This is suitable for residential and non-residential buildings and for new construction and for retrofit applications alike. When combined with low energy cooling sources it can replace compressor cooling for buildings with low internal cooling loads.

 

Recommendations:

The following recommendations are based on our experience as energy-conscious consultants and researchers:

· The government should lead the effort to save energy and to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions. Buildings constructed for the government should be designed to use significantly less energy for thermal conditioning than that prescribed by code.

· The use of energy-saving technologies in non-governmental buildings should be subsidized by low-interest loans and utility rebate programs.

· The Public Utility Commissions should allow utilities to rebate energy saving measures beyond the savings potential to start the process of designing energy-efficient buildings. However, measures which help to shave the utility peak but do not save energy e.g., ice storage, should not be part of any rebate program.

· Utilities should be encouraged to considerably increase demand charges. Current charges do not sufficiently discourage oversizing of equipment and fail to inspire designs for minimum loads.

· Building energy codes should be rewritten to reflect the savings potential of alternative distribution systems, heating and cooling sources. Commissioning and maintenance requirements for HVAC systems should be a part of all codes.

· To educate architects and mechanical engineers about energy-saving technologies, an appropriate curriculum should be introduced at the University level. This could be co-funded by the Federal Government, the State governments and by the private industry.

· Designers are in need of a text book which provides information on how to design energy efficient equipment. The text book should be co-written by researchers, designers and builders.

· Research programs should provide design tools to help mechanical engineers design energy-efficient buildings and alternative HVAC-systems.

When pondering a research and implementation program for the future, we must not forget that every dollar invested in research to improve even slightly technologies with poor performance will reduce the funding available for the development of new competitive products.

References:

[1] Clinton, W.J. and A. Gore: "The Climate Change Action Plan," October 1993

[2] O'Leary, H. and G.E. Brown: "With the Superconducting Super Collider on the shelf, what does the future hold for big science", Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Currents, Vol. 21, No. 46, December 1993

[3] Meierhans, R.: "Slab Cooling and Earth Coupling", ASHRAE Transactions, Vol. 99. Pt.2, 1993

 

Home