Sustainable Design and Construction

Me (Nathan Gauthier) on Green Building Matters Podcast

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Wed, 28 Nov 2018 19:35:00 +0000

A few weeks ago I was interviewed by Charlie Cichetti for his Green Building Matters Podcast. I've listened to other episodes in the past and was very excited when he reached out to me and asked if I'd do an episode. Here's the link if you're interested:

https://www.gbes.com/green-building-matters-podcast/harvard-and-maritime-high-performance-building-edu-with-nathan-gauthier/

Choosing by Advantage

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Tue, 30 Oct 2018 17:01:00 +0000

We've been doing a lot of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) projects lately. For example, I spend every Monday at a collocation site for a new dormitory at Rhode Island School of Design. All of the designers and key sub-contractors are present and most of the subs are "designing" their own systems - essentially going straight to shop drawings. The groups are organized by cluster, with individuals sometimes included in more than one cluster and of course inter-cluster communication encouraged. I'm the MEP cluster lead. The photo below shows us reviewing possible MEP layouts with the structural engineer and architect as we place and size utility shafts.

One of the things I like about this process is using Choosing by Advantage (CBA) to select the best systems for the project. When we were selecting the HVAC systems, we started with 7 potential options. We then identified 9 potential advantages one system might have over another (see below) and eventually selected a 3-pipe VRF for heating and cooling with a dedicated outdoor air system through energy recovery ventilators.

IPD and CBA are ways to help project teams deliver high performance buildings to our clients. The integrated approach and looking at the building holistically allows us to optimize the whole and makes for a really rewarding experience.

A related post on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nathangauthier/detail/recent-activity/shares/

Ventilation Rate Success Story

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Wed, 25 Apr 2018 18:35:00 +0000

We're just about to finish another semester of ENVR 119C - High Performance Buildings for Occupant Wellness at the Harvard Extension School. The class focuses on how the built environment impacts occupant wellbeing. Tomorrow (4/26/2018) we'll have Piers MacNaughton, ScD, Associate Director of the Healthy Buildings Program in the Center for Health and the Global Environment at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Dr. MacNaughton is one of the authors of the great CogFx studies that have shown a clear link between outdoor air ventilation rates and improved cognitive function in building occupants. Link: http://naturalleader.com/thecogfxstudy/

Dr. MacNaughton's visit reminded me that when I was teaching this class last time, we had Dr. Jack Spengler come in to talk about their paper The Impact Of Green Buildings On Cognitive Function. Students were surprised to learn that even ventilation rates typically considered "safe" may be having a negative impact on cognitive function. Applying these lessons as part of his final project, Bryan Johnson evaluated ventilation rates at his wife's school in Arizona. She teaches 6 classes per day of 35 to 40 students. She had complained to the facilities department and to her husband that the room felt stuffy. Using the class project as an excuse to intervene, Bryan found the outdoor air damper position for the air handler serving her portion of the school was open to 25%. Bryan bought a Netatmo sensor to test CO2 concentrations (among other parameters) and found that CO2 levels were generally above 1,000 ppm during occupied hours, at times going as high as 1,350. He and his wife convinced the school to open the air dampers to 55% and found this brought typical CO2 concentrations to around 650 ppm. They then opened the dampers to 65% and got levels to about 600 ppm. The class has been operating for the past few weeks under these conditions and anecdotal evidence from teacher and students has been positive.

After class, Bryan emailed me with feedback from his wife. She received her year end district standardized final exam scores. Scores for all 6 of this year's classes were up compared to last year by an average of 5%. While the sample size is low and his work may not get published in any peer-reviewed journals, I wanted to share Bryan's results (with his permission) and applaud his effort. He was planning to approach the school with his findings and a series of additional recommendations including improving the lighting quality to more closely approximate natural sunlight thanks in large part to a great lecture from Dr. Lockley of Harvard Medical School's Sleep Institute. Nice work Bryan!

Monitoring-Based Commissioning (MBCx)

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Fri, 09 Jun 2017 15:04:00 +0000

Shawmut Design and Construction recently delivered a monitoring-based commissioning (MBCx) program to one of our museum clients. The program by Panoramic Power uses clip on meters that take current readings every 10 seconds and sends them wirelessly to a local hub. Data is then sent off-site to their servers to be processed and displayed on a customizable dashboard. We're now able to remotely view the equipment and add rules to alert us if there are any opportunities for increased efficiency or indications of potential problems.

The images in this article show our work on some Multistack chillers. We’re monitoring all three phases of each of the three modular chillers in the museum. The image below shows the installed clip on sensors and the one above shows Chuck checking the amperage on his handheld meter to double-check the readings. A screenshot from the dashboard is included at the bottom, which shows how each of the three modules performed during the day. This information is available real-time and stored for long-term data analysis.

Once the sensors were installed and mapped, we added rules to alert us of any potential issues. We’re checking if any of the compressors are short cycling, if we’re not rotating through the three chillers to spread out the run time, if we have an overly high electricity draw from any one chiller, etc. The program is set up to automatically send a work order through the building’s computerized maintenance management system anytime an alert is triggered. We’re tracking chiller electricity consumption versus outside conditions and using the museum’s electricity tariff to show the cost to run the chillers on a daily, weekly, monthly basis. We are also monitoring the chilled water pumps, fluid coolers, and other components so we can a full picture of chiller plant efficiency and track the overall kW per ton. There are similar sensors on other equipment throughout the museum, from air handling units to computer room air conditioners.

Monitoring-based commissioning is now a very accessible technology. It is cost effective and can quickly pay for itself through energy savings. Clients not only save money, they also get increased reliability as MBCx allows for predictive maintenance to correct potential issues before they become a problem. Definitely something worth considering for complex buildings and anything with critical use equipment.

Site Surveying Toys

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:24:00 +0000

Chris evaluating site from above.

Last week I joined engineer Chris Rollins and University of Rwanda architecture student Christian "Kara" to do some surveying for a project in Kigali. Chris has done a lot of construction work throughout Africa and has been a great source of information for my UNICEF projects. The construction manual I've drafted is inspired by something similar he produced for projects in South Sudan. During this visit, we were able to play with a number of toys I don't usually have access to. Here's a quick summary with photos of the equipment.

We started off by marking a 10 meter by 10 meter grid pattern over the entire site with flags. Chris brought a Keson MP401E measuring wheel to get the distances, so no need to deal with standard tapes. A measuring wheel makes surveying a site much quicker and easier on the back. We used the same tool to measure distance to services (water, electric, paved road, etc.). It has a pause button on it, so when we'd run up on a large obstacle, we could pause it, move to the side, and restart to continue our reading. The handle folds down and Chris was able to fly with this and the other equipment. Chris is actually pictured in the Keson catalogue using one of these wheels for Engineers Without Borders in Malawi.

Chris using the measuring wheel.

Chris centering the bubble.

Once we had the grid laid out, we used a DeWALT DW090PK builders level to take elevations at each point. The builders level was set up at one of our grid points and all other points were measured compared to this point by having somebody stand at the point with the aluminum grade rod to get a reading. Chris will put the points as X, Y, Z coordinates into a spreadsheet, export as comma separated variable file, and import into AutoCAD Civil 3D and create a topographic map of the site, which will later be used to design the building, estimate cut and fill, etc.

Chris on the smart end, Kara holding the grade rod.

Kara trying his hand at the smart end of the level.

Kara about to drop the hammer.

Finally, to evaluate soil conditions, we used a Kessler K-100 dynamic soil penetrometer to get representative samples across the site. The DCP test uses an weighted hammer dropped from a set distance to pound a drive rod into the soil. Once you know the general soil type, the rate of rod penetration is entered into a computer and the CBR (California Bearing Ratio) value for the soil at different depths is given. CBR is a penetration test for evaluating the load bearing capacity of soils originally developed for road construction by the California Department of Transportation. Crushed California limestone is the reference value with a CBR of 100. Our site was getting values between 4 and 40 depending on where and how deep we were testing. These values will influence building foundation design and influence what type of construction can be built on site. This is the first time I've seen the DCP in use and I can think of many times when it would have been useful for one of my projects, especially those that have a lot of cut and fill (almost all projects in Rwanda, "Land of 1,000 Hills"). It would be good to sample un-disturbed soil and then compare that to the compacted backfill to make sure we get sufficient compaction to avoid settling and cracking concrete. The Kessler version we used even comes in a durable Pelican carrying case, perfect for flying around Africa.

Chris explaining the DCP.

Kara dropping hammer, Chris entering values into computer.

All of the survey data collected will be used to develop site plans for the client. Having accurate data means they'll know exactly what they're getting into if they choose to move forward. I've "surveyed" dozens of project in Rwanda, but this was the most thorough to date and had the best toys by far. Thanks Chris and Kara.

Making Gravel

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 09:51:00 +0000

In order to make concrete, first you need aggregate (gravel). At all of my projects in Rwanda, this means getting a delivery of large rocks and chipping away with a hammer until you get a pile of small rocks. They usually set the rocks on a circular pillow made of woven grass (the same pillows they use to carry stones on their heads). It is typically women and older men that get gravel duty, though this time there was also a younger man. This video is from a visit to the Mugombwa refugee camp on November 20, 2014. The aggregate will be used in construction of an early childhood development center (pre-school).

Site Clearing a Big Rock

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:36:00 +0000

Site clearing for the new Early Childhood Development & Family Centre in Mbuye Sector, Ruhango District (Rwanda). Unfortunately, there is a big rock in the top part of the site, much of which has to be removed. Very slow and strenuous work. Here's a video showing some of the effort. Not too much mechanical equipment (like jack hammers) in Rwanda.

Biking in Rwanda

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Wed, 06 Aug 2014 08:58:00 +0000

Despite the challenges associated with biking in the "Land of 1000 Hills", bikes are still a very popular choice for commuting, catching a tax, and transporting goods. Here's a shot of some bikes parked while people attend a meeting during umaganda in Mbuye Sector, Ruhango District.

One way to get over the challenges of biking up steep hills with a single speed is to hitch a ride from a slow (relatively) moving truck, which everybody does. Of course, going downhill is relatively easy - dangerous, but easy.

Most ex-pats are comfortable riding on the dirt roads or foot paths (some of the best single-track in the world), but riding on the paved roads is not for the feint of heart as there is very little awareness of bikers by Rwandan drivers. I've seen a number of bloody (more than one fatal) accidents. The roads are narrow and people don't give bikers (or motos for that matter) room when passing. As Kigali increases from just over a million people to 2 million (2020 projection) and eventually 4 million (2040 projection) it would be great to find ways to encourage biking and make it safer and more convenient for those that do.

RYACA "Dufashe Isi / Let's Save the World" Video

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Thu, 17 Jul 2014 12:24:00 +0000

Here's a video on protecting the environment done by RYACA (Rwanda Youth Alliance for Climate Actions). I helped them prepare proposals / grant applications and reviewed the lyrics. Turned out great. Congratulations everybody, especially Landry Ndriko Mayigane, who really drove the project. Funding from US Embassy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmEyBuvJaww

Community Engagement Exercise

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Mon, 14 Jul 2014 15:06:00 +0000

On June 28^th, we held a community charrette for a new Early Childhood Development and Family Centre in Mbuye Sector, Ruhango District. The event was organized as part of “umaganda”, the monthly day of service that occurs on the last Saturday of every month across Rwanda. We started with two hours of community work to start leveling the site and prepare it for construction. Approximately 300 people, mostly men, showed up to work each with his own shove, hoe, or rake. The architects and myself had already staked out the site and were around to help direct the work as well as lend a hand with the digging. There is about 5 meters of elevation change from the top of the site to the bottom, which is about 25 meters away. The community is going to remove 2.5 meters from one side and add it to the other side before construction starts. The district will hire a contractor to build retaining walls at the top and bottom of the slope and then UNICEF will execute construction of the facility via an agreement with a partner organization.

After site leveling, we gathered for some dancing and then community engagement activities. UNICEF partnered with Imbuto Foundation to assist with these activities and they started by explaining the idea of the Early Childhood Development and Family Centre, which incorporate health, nutrition, and sanitation programmes to benefit young children, their families, and the community at large. When complete, the centres will belong and be operated by the community, with support from UNICEF and Imbuto for training and developing an operating plan.

Once Imbuto explained the goal of the project, the architecture firm ASA described the current design using a wooden model as a visual aid. Since the site provided is long and narrow, the seven buildings will have to be oriented in an S-shape instead of the circular orientation used in areas with larger sites. The idea is to provide three stimulation rooms for the young children (ages 0 to 6), a covered multipurpose room, demonstration kitchen with storage area, an administration building with two offices, and an “ecosan” toilet that separates solids from liquids and uses both as soil amenities. The entire site is fenced in to provide security and children are provided with custom playground equipment. Rainfall from the roofs of all buildings are piped to a 30,000 liter underground masonry tank, similar to what is commonly used for methane digesters.

After hearing of the basic design, community members were broken into small groups and given a series of cards showing related images side-by-side. One card for example showed a built-in masonry stove for the kitchen as well as a free standing metal and concrete stove. Other topics included the finishes on the walls (exposed bricks vs. plaster), ground covering for the central courtyard (exposed soil, grass, brick pavers, or gravel), and even the animal they’d like to see incorporated into the design of the slide (elephant vs. cow). The groups were asked to review the two or four pictures on each card, select the one they would most like to see in their ECD&F centre, and fold the card so that image was face-up. All selections were set on the ground when the group was finished and our team walked around taking photos of the selections and the people in the group. Everybody seemed very excited to be able to contribute to the eventual ECD&F design and there was lots of great conversation about what would be best for their children. There were groups of men, women and children participating in a total of approximately 26 groups.

Once preferences of all groups had been recorded, we explained how the information would be used to improve the ECD&F design and customize it for their preferences. ASA compiled the results to share with the team and will finalize the design based on this feedback. A copy of the results is included below. Many of the results confirmed what we had already assumed, for example 88% of respondents indicated they prefer a built-in masonry stove over a free-standing traditional stove, 92% prefer the latrine to be located far from the front entrance, and 89% would like to have a dedicated water fountain. There were also some results that may necessitate design changes. When asked about preferred landscaping options, the majority of groups preferred brick pavers, which were not included in any of the initial designs. Almost three-fourths of the respondents preferred an option for playground equipment than what we used in this first round of ECD&F construction. Nearly two-thirds of people would rather have a reed ceiling in the stimulation rooms instead of the exposed clay tile roof we’ve been providing. Perhaps most surprising, the majority of groups preferred the S-shaped site orientation over the circular shape because of the feeling of it being more open and inviting. Our initial thought was to always provide the circular shape unless space constraints forced the S-shape. This valuable feedback will help us tailor the design to the local context while also encourage a sense of empowerment and ownership to the community.

The District and Sector officials were extremely happy with the event and took a large group out to a celebratory lunch during which they indicated their excitement about the project and appreciation for employing such a participatory process. We committed to sharing the results of the charrette and having ASA visit the site on a weekly basis to direct the site leveling works. UNICEF and the District representative will visit at least monthly to monitor progress.

Video about Architects for UNICEF Projects in Rwanda

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 16:02:00 +0000

Active Social Architecture (ASA) are architects for the pre-primary schools and early childhood development centers I've been managing for UNICEF. As part of an exhibit in Milan, they had this video made. The videographer only had a few days to shoot, none of the ECDs were complete yet, weather was bad, and they didn't get UNICEF permission (which is why they're not mentioned), but the video is really good. Shows off construction techniques in rural Rwanda. Brick masonry buildings with corrugated metal (pre-primary) or clay tile (ECD) roofs. I'm in the background a couple of times.

Video by What Took You So Long: https://vimeo.com/89417328

PBH Weatherization Project

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:28:00 +0000

Back in 2010 I lead a project to work with Harvard students to weatherize the Philips Brooks House. It was a great project with over 50 students attending (including the woman who is now my wife, a post-doc at HSPH at the time) and lots of energy saved. The case study won AASHE's first Campus and Student Sustainability Award for “Best Campus Case Study”. Before the big day, I reached out to Jim Merchant of Pirates Lane (http://pirateslane.com/) who agreed to attend and prepare a video. While looking for something else today I ran across the video and was saddened to see that it had far fewer views than my last cat video (our cat Magilla Glub Glub has a Facebook page). Anyway, with that in mind, I'm sharing the case study and link to the video here. Special thanks to the Green Building Services team for all of their work before, during and after the event. Enjoy.

Case Study on AASHE site:
http://www.aashe.org/resources/case-studies/phillips-brooks-house-student-weatherization-project

Video (about 10 minutes long):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YftpU-fkahU

Phillips Brooks House Student Weatherization Project

Institution(s)

Harvard University

Author(s)

Nathan Gauthier, Assistant Director, Office for Sustainability, Harvard University

Project Overview

On May 2nd, more than 50 Harvard students took a break from studying for finals and picked up caulk guns to help improve the energy efficiency of the Phillips Brooks House in Harvard Yard. The project was a collaboration between the Office for Sustainability, the Phillips Brooks House Association, the student Environmental Action Committee, and the Faculty of Arts and Sciences Green Program. Student labor was used to implement 23 weatherization projects in the building. The project is estimated to save more than 9 tons of CO2 equivalent and nearly $4,000 in utility costs annually.

Background

The project was initiated when students from the Environmental Action Committee (EAC) approached the Office for Sustainability and Faculty of Arts and Sciences Green Program asking if there was a way to involve students in a weatherization project similar to what is done by Cambridge Home Energy Efficiency Team (http://heetma.com/). The OFS team toured the building and identified nearly 40 practical energy conservation measures for the Phillips Brooks House, which is a 12,800 square foot, 100 year old, brick building. OFS then designed a program to work with students and issued a proposal to the FAS Office of Planning and Physical Resources to work with EAC students to plan and execute a student-lead weatherization event that would significantly improve the building's performance while engaging students in the process.

Project Goals

The primary goal of the project was to engage students and help them feel empowered to make a positive change on their campus. OFS and FAS wanted students to feel vested in the University's greenhouse gas reduction goal and to encourage them to do their part. The students wanted to have their contributions acknowledged and be exposed to the nuances of building operations and the details around how buildings operate and what opportunities exist to improve building performance. Additional goals included reducing the greenhouse gas emissions and operations costs of the Phillips Brooks House. An added benefit was receiving positive press highlighting student and administrative collaboration.

Project Implementation

Of the nearly 40 energy conservation measures identified for the building, more than 20 were selected on the basis that they could be safely and effectively implemented with student labor. The OFS and student planning team began weekly meetings to organize the project. OFS coordinated with Environmental Health and Safety on student safety issues, the Office of General Council on liability issues, Human Resources on labor relation issues and negotiating with the trade unions, and Facilities Maintenance Operations to identify technical resources that would be beneficial to project success. Cambridge HEET, a local non-profit that specializes in home weatherizations, was consulted to share lessons learned and to provide pre- and post-project blower door testing.

On the day of the event, participants were organized into 7 teams, each led by an OFS staff member and a student leader who had been trained on their tasks ahead of time. The 50 plus student volunteers were trained on safety protocols, tool use, and how to implement the ECMs and then supervised as they performed the work. Projects included caulking storm windows, installing low-flow plumbing fixtures, replacing lamps with compact fluorescents or low-mercury super T8 linear fluorescents, sealing a chimney, installing door sweeps and door jambs, insulating steam pipes, adding smart power strips on computers and timers on water coolers, installing educational signage, and many others. OFS staff was on hand to take photographs and a local videographer responded to a Craigslist ad asking for a volunteer to make a short film. Two full-time interns from Wentworth Institute of Technology worked with OFS throughout this project including helping lead weatherization groups on the day of the event.

Timeline

The project was on a very aggressive timeline because it needed to be implemented before students left for the summer. Students approached OFS and FAS in the last week of February, 2010. OFS Green Building Services walked the building on March 8 and issued a proposal complete with nearly 40 potential ECM opportunities on March 17th. The proposal assumed almost 200 hours of OFS staff time to complete the project with all of the recommended components. FAS approved the proposal the next day (3/18/10) and the OFS team began planning for the event. On March 23, OFS sent the student organizers a detailed description of the proposed process going forward and asked for contact information for student team leaders for the day of the event, as well as for their recommended date for the event and times for weekly team meetings. On March 26 the student organizers provided much of the information requested, though a date for the event wasn't finalized as we tried to coordinate availability of the building with OFS staff availability and student breaks. Student organizers and OFS began weekly breakfast meetings to go over project details, with FAS Office of Physical Planning and Cambridge HEET attending one meeting each to lend their assistance and get updates. By the first week of April, OFS staff and student leaders began visiting the building to put together detailed lists of materials needed to implement their projects and perform practice runs to ensure everybody knew how to perform the tasks for which they were responsible. On March 24th, OFS lead a larger group of students around the building to review all projects identified, including those identified but not being implemented as part of the student project such as demand control ventilation in the lounge area or variable frequency drives on the heating hot water loop. OFS had completed energy calculations for all projects and costed out the materials needed in order to share this information with the students and help them understand the utility cost and greenhouse gas reduction potential of each measure as well as their cost effectiveness. In the middle of April, May 2nd was selected as the day of the event. This was a Sunday during the reading period prior to exams. Invitations to attend were sent to the environmentally themed students groups on April 15th with an online sign up sheet using Google Docs. Materials were purchased during the last two weeks of April. The project took place on May 2, from 11:00 to 3:00, with OFS arriving at 9:00 to start setting up and staying to 4:00 to clean up. Coffee, juice and pastries were awaiting students at sign in and Veggie Planet rice dishes during the lunch break.

Financing

All funding was provided by the FAS Office of Planning and Physical Resources, paid out of their operating budget.

Annual savings are estimated at $3,750 in annual utility costs. We did not quantify the additional maintenance savings from re-lamping all 250 lamps in the building. None of our projects were expected to have an increased maintenance cost. We also did not try to quantify the improved productivity from staff being more comfortable or the benefits of educating students and how this might influence their behaviors going forward.

The total materials cost for the project was $3,300, of which $2,800 was billed to the FAS with the idea that remaining cost went towards tools that could be reused for future projects and would be paid for by OFS. This material value paid by FAS includes the cost of 7 new storm windows, which was not a project performed by the students but was critical to ensure the students caulking the storm window frames knew that their efforts were not in vain. This value also includes the $500 for lunch and $50 for breakfast. Most materials were purchased through Grainger, with additional materials purchased through Energy Federation Incorporated, Home Trends, Watertown Plumbing Supply, Home Depot, Staples, and Conservation Technology.

OFS staff put in 202 hours of time into the project, 192 of which were billed to FAS because of our not to exceed contract agreement. Facilities Maintenance Operations charged for 6 hours of work to have their plumber and pipe wrapper on-site on the day of the event.
Total project costs were $24,043, most of which was from labor.

Project Results

More than 50 students attended the May 2nd event, in addition to the more than a dozen student group leaders, OFS staff, and the Wentworth Interns. The initial, conservative estimates expected a reduction of 9 metric tons of CO2 equivalent of greenhouse gas emissions and $3,750 in utility costs per year. While full verification of the energy reduction may take a year to assess, the building was given a pre- and post-project blower door test to quantify air leakage. The test showed nearly 1,800 fewer cubic feet of air coming into the building when under pressure after the project, which translates to nearly 180 square inches of gaps in the building envelope that were filled… truly excellent results. The bulk of the benefit will be in the winter, when the significant reduction in infiltration will result in steam savings. Everybody responding to the lessons learned survey indicated that they thought the project was very valuable to students and that they hope it is replicated again next year.

Lessons Learned

After the project, a lessons learned survey was sent out to all of the OFS staff and student organizers. 73% of the respondents felt the project was good (4 / 5) and the remaining 27% felt it was excellent (5/5). All respondents indicated that it was a good project that they would like to see repeated.
There were multiple suggestions about broadening the outreach to include faculty and staff, as there were none at the event. The project would have also benefited from having the date confirmed earlier so the outreach could have been done over a longer period of time. Even with very little notice, more than 50 students attended on a Sunday when studying for finals, which seems to indicate there is a lot of interest in this type of event.

Additional time all around would have made the project go more smoothly and would have also likely reduced the cost to FAS as we had to invest significant and possibly redundant resources in order to get everything done on time. While we were able to successfully execute all 23 projects, we had multiple people working on the same or similar tasks for different projects when some of this could have been streamlined if time allowed.

There were a few minor issues during the event with ECMs that didn't go exactly as expected (pipe insulation not quite fitting, dual flush handles not working with all of the toilets, etc.). If we repeat this project, we'll make sure the dry runs in the weeks leading up to the project are more in-depth and can actually confirm the feasibility and the correct parts for all projects. We'll also make sure to order the parts further in advance. One of the packs of lamps we ordered for the chandeliers didn't have the fixture adapter and we didn't have the extra lamps on hand we were expecting.

Another lesson learned was about the door weather seals and students using the drills. It was hard to drill through the steel kick plate without using the more aggressive drill bits, but it was also really hard for students to stop the drill at the right depth. In the future, we'd like some sort of depth guide on the drill to reduce this over-drilling.

Because the blower door test was a bit of an after-thought, we couldn't get Cambridge HEET out on the day of our event. While they were able to come beforehand and afterwards, in the future we would like students to be able to see the actual test and witness the improvements.

The film that was made for us by Pirates Lane Video turned out really nicely and putting an ad on Craigslist for a volunteer videographer worked well. We had more than a dozen people volunteer their services. In the future, we'd like to have an OFS staff walk around with the videographer to make sure he's able to film all of the projects. We would have also liked filming of the predatory planning meetings if possible.

We created educational signage and a poster summarizing all of the projects for the students. These sorts of occupant engagement efforts partnered very well with the more typical energy conservation measures and helped make for a more complete event.

We were able to get reusable cups and glasses from Harvard University Hospitality and Dining Services and used all compostable plates and silverware (with composting bins that the OFS staff took home afterwards and brought back to work on Monday). All of the dishes from Veggie Planet for lunch were vegetarian. A number of students commented on appreciating that we made sure to use sustainable dining practices and this is of course something we'd like to do again in the future. A number of people also mentioned that it might be easier to eat pizza instead of rice dishes while outside working.

There were also comments about the project being more for awareness than energy savings, and it may have been nice to have contractors there actually implementing some of the more significant energy saving opportunities at the same time. We identified another 15 to 20 projects that had good payback and would save significant energy, but would require a professional contractor to implement. It might be worth combining the installation wtih the student work in the future. It is also worth noting that the vast majority of the project costs came from planning the weatherization event and not from the actual materials. Using student labor to thoroughly weatherize a building in this manner does not seem to be the most cost effective way to get the job done assuming you have to pay for the staff time needed for planning. The benefits, of course, go well beyond the immediate energy savings from the ECM projects.

There were a few ECMs that really only allowed a couple of people to work on them at a time. In order to engage more students, we would have needed more team leaders and possibly more tools (such as drills). This was only true for a couple of projects like the plumbing projects or door sweeps, but something to keep in mind. Trying to keep 50 or more students engaged simultaneously requires a lot of advanced planning and a lot of knowledgeable leaders.

A critical lesson to share is that early coordination with all stakeholders is critical and that doing so allowed the project to happen without any last minute concerns or hang ups. It requires motivated student leaders, knowledgeable sustainability staff, and facilities leader willing to invest in this kind of project (thank you Jay Phillips). If coordinated with all parties early, potential obstacles can be identified and solutions suggested.

Everybody involved felt this project was a success and that future projects would be even better. It is difficult to succinctly share all of the lessons learned, but the OFS team is very optimistic that if we were able to do a similar event in the future they'll be even more successful than the first.

Quick Look at Embodied Energy of Two Roof Solutions

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:00:00 +0000

A friend who is proposing a vaulted roof made from compressed earth blocks / tiles asked me to take a look at embodied energy between his proposed solution and a typical concrete roof. My response is below. Note the initial roof area, thickness, and materials for both the proposed and typical roof were provided by the friend. It appears that the compressed earthen blocks have significantly less embodied energy compared to a concrete dome solution. Another comparison might be the domed earthen blocks to a flat (less area) concrete roof, but this is not represented below. Let me know if you have any questions. Nathan Gauthier

Here is a summary of your emissions and embodied energy comparisons for the two roof options. The earthen dome option has significantly less embodied CO2 emissions (81% less). See below. All conversion factors come form the Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE v2.0) put out by Bath University.

Most of your savings comes from the tile roof not having steel reinforcement (very high embodied energy compared to other materials) and the earthen tile roof thickness (150 mm) being much less than the concrete (250 mm). Sand, aggregate and cement have the same CO2 per unit for each roof, but there is more volume / mass in the thicker concrete roof. I had to make a number of assumptions (type of lime, strength of concrete, percent recycled content for steel, etc.) but they don’t have a significant impact. Detailed breakdowns follow:

All volume to mass conversions from: http://www.simetric.co.uk/si_materials.htm

I didn't have Rwanda-specific emissions data, but sand, water, aggregate will all be collected locally with hand labor (aggregate will be crushed by hand), the earthen blocks are hand pressed (machine originally from South Africa), and concrete, steel, and anything else that is imported will come by truck into Rwanda and probably by boat to Mombasa, Kenya.

Quality Control - Fired Brick Masonry

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:53:00 +0000

Working on early childhood development centers in Rwanda has had me inspecting a lot of masonry construction. There was very little quality assurance put in place when the projects began, so for the most part it has been regular inspections, identifying mistakes, demolishing parts of walls, and re-building correctly. Going forward, a robust total quality management plan will be introduced form the beginning, complete with minimum qualifications, written instructions and signage, assigned people responsible for quality, checklists (pre-construction, during construction, and post), mock-ups, etc. Here are some of the most common errors.

This wall shows what is supposed to be a Flemish bond, but the header bricks (the single brick running perpendicular to the wall) are cut. The masons do this because the dimensions are bad / inconsistent. If they put the headers in so they are flush with the outside of the building, then there are large divots on the inside where the brick isn't long enough. Ideally, the bricks would be long enough to be flush on the inside and outside (as long as two brick widths plus mortar). We've asked them to pre-select the longest bricks and use them for headers and then to center the headers so there is a small divot on either side. Once Identified as a problem, I prepared signage to have on sites as a teaching tool / prompt, but more needed to happen at the beginning of construction.

Another common mistake is bad grout. We're getting very inconsistent mixes (bricks can often be easily removed from walls after the grout is dry). One reason is nobody uses lime, so it is just a small amount of cement and some very dirty sand (often not river sand and they haven't been washing). Regardless of the mix, instead of 1 cm mortar joints, we're seeing as much as 5 cm. This is partly because of un-skilled / un-trained masons, but also because of bricks with different dimensions than assumed by the architects. The architects have shown every single brick in their drawings and when foremen see a certain number of rows of brick under the window sill with specific dimensions given, they are increasing the amount of mortar per row to get the bricks to the level shown on the plans. Going forward, we need to clarify that the mortar joint dimensions are critical (1 cm) and that heights and number of brick courses shown on the drawings for some items, like window heights, have some flexibility.

Finally, the rebar in masonry buttresses and columns is new for most masons and we've seen lots of problems. Ideally, the two rebar are spaced 10 cm apart, centered over the buttress or column, and the bricks are woven between the rebar. We're getting rebar poorly set in the foundation, so getting bricks between them / incorporating them into buttresses is difficult. Often, the masons will push the two rebar together and treat them as one because it is easier to lay brick around, though much less structurally secure. Even when it is pointed out that rebar are in the wrong position within a column foundation, we have seen the masons bend the rebar at the bottom to get them where they should be so the entire column becomes wobbly as there is slack in the rebar (and the grout isn't very sticky).

Evaluating Natural Daylight Levels

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 16:12:00 +0000

After visiting one of our new early childhood development sites, we noticed the inside of the stimulation rooms (classrooms) were a little dark. They buildings are supposed to be naturally daylit, but nobody on the design team knew anything about estimating daylight or optimizing the design. Subsequently, I’ve reviewed the design and taken light levels in the field. My initial conclusion was that the light levels in the center of the rooms at the floor level often met or exceeded recommended levels (primarily because the windows extend very low to the floor below typical vision glazing and light reaches this spot from multiple directions), but at 1 meter off the floor and in many of the corners the levels were below recommended levels. The Illuminating Engineers Society (IES) recommends 50 foot candles (500 lux) on the writing surface for schools for visual comfort and productivity. Based on the 4 sites I measured, the levels with full sun are typically:

20 - 30 FC in centre of room at 1 meter

60 - 80 FC in centre of room at floor

5 - 10 FC on bench in “front” of room

With these light levels, activities low to the ground in the center of the room (building is designed for children 0 - 6) will be well lit with daylight on sunny days and most overcast days, but children in the corners of the room will have less light than ideal. While a couple of the sites have electric lights available to help alleviate this condition (two, 13 watt CFLs without a fixture), we should advise teachers in all sites to focus art projects, reading, and other visually sensitive tasks away from the bench area.

There are a number of potential ways to improve the lighting levels if doing a re-design, as well as some options to improve levels in the already constructed buildings. We decided to go with painting the interior brick white to improve reflectance. Each site has three stimulation rooms so we painted the two longest walls white from floor to ceiling in two of the rooms at one site and re-did our testing. Light levels were almost double in the painted rooms and significantly improved light levels. All sites have since been painted (some not yet to the ceiling as in the image below). While the bench area is still darker than is ideal, the rooms are much improved as a result. At other sites that are nearing the end of construction, we're going to remove some of the brick vent holes at top of the front wall and replace with a framed, translucent plastic window, which should bring the daylight levels up to recommended levels.

The lesson learned in this exercise is that daylight modeling or at least crude daylight factor calculations are critical for buildings intended to be naturally lit.

Extra info (sent to my supervisor when trying to raise the issue):

An easy way to evaluate natural lighting is daylight factor (DF), which is the ratio of outside illuminance over inside illuminance, expressed in per cent. The higher the DF, the more natural light is available in the room.

The general rule is a room needs to achieve at least 2% DF to be considered daylit, though this is still considered gloomy and electric lighting is needed most of the day. From 2 to 5% the daylighting is better, but electric lighting is still needed up until 5% for optimal visual comfort.

Using the crudest rule of thumb method of estimating daylight factor (DF = 0.1 * Glazing Area / Floor Area), it looks like we would just be above the 2% “daylit” threshold as we get 2.7% DF (13.7 m2 glazing / 50.8 m2 floor). Unfortunately, this is overly optimistic in our case for a number of reason. Daylight factor is the sum of three components: direct lighting component (DC), externally reflected lighting component (ERC), and internally reflected lighting component (IRC) such that DF = DC + ERC + IRC. The rule of thumb metrics assume typical office building values for all variables. There are a few problems with this method as we need to account for:

Many of the windows and one door are shaded from most direct sunlight by roofs above
All of the masonry vent openings are deeper (22 cm) than they are tall (8 cm) so let in no direct sunlight most of the day
Most interior surfaces are dark and non-reflective and standard calculations assume partially reflective white ceilings and light colored interiors

As a result, most of our windows and openings have 0 direct lighting component because of the overhangs (good for avoiding heat gain, but also less visible light), we have very little externally reflected daylight since there are no surrounding buildings other than the others we’ve built with non-reflective exterior surfaces, and we have little internally reflected lighting as our interior materials (especially the ceiling) are darker and less reflective than a typical office. We do have the benefit of very clear glazing in the windows with higher than typical visual transmittance (VT) and of course no glazing in the ventilation openings.

Multiple field measurements on the overcast day in Site A showed a range of 1% to 2% DF in the center at 1 meter and about 2.5% to 5% DF in the center on the floor. DF calculations at other sites were not possible as it needs to be overcast and low enough direct sun levels to not overload the meter, but they confirmed the Site B assessment by showing full sun measurements in line with what was expected.

To get up to the 5% daylight factor for the entire room (suggested target), we’d ideally incorporate a combination of increased opening size, especially up high where the contribution to daylight factor is greater, and lighter and more reflective interior surfaces. Even adding the colored paint in the current rooms has already brightened the space a lot compared to the pre-painted condition. We’ll see the impact of the white walls in Site A.

Earthen Ducts Question

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:36:00 +0000

EMAIL QUESTION ABOUT EARTHEN DUCTS:

Nathan,

My husband and I are designing a modest home in northern Indiana to passive house standards. We have a beautiful building site on a south-facing ridge in the middle of forty acres. Picture a house earth sheltered on three sides and open to the south to incorporate passive solar heating/cooling. We will not need a furnace or AC. What we do need is a well-designed whole house ventilation and dehumidification system. I’ve been researching these topics for over a year.

My conclusion: I want to explore the concept of using an earth tube or tubes to precondition our fresh air intake. If I can build a tube system that will achieve a 50% reduction in moisture load on incoming air in the dog days of summer, then tubes are the way to go. My math is not up to the task of evaluating the design. I’ve been trying to connect with a mechanical engineer who could give advice on the psychrometrics. If I can’t find someone to help me geek out the system variables for our site (tube diameter/length, depth, rate of air flow, pressure) then we will have to go with a purely mechanical system to be on the safe side. And then I will always wonder if we missed a grand opportunity.

EMAIL RESPONSE:

I love the idea of Passivhaus, though haven’t been able to work on any projects yet. Good luck on the project.

Calculating the benefits of earth ducts is probably above my math too (I’m not an engineer). Not one of the easier systems to analyze – I was expecting something easier J We recently looked at it for a project in Durban, South Africa and besides calculating the potential energy savings, issues to consider include risk of condensation, fan power, and cost of construction.

The ground temperature below a couple of meters is usually around the average annual air temperature for your location. The ground temperature tends to lag the air temperature by a couple of months and the deeper you go the less the ground temp changes. Using data from South Bend – Michiana Regional Airport, we get the graph below, showing your ground temperature average is about 50 degrees F, but ranges from 40 to 62 at 13 feet and from 30 to 72 at 1.6 feet (this was all in meters originally – so the units for feet aren’t regular).

With enough surface area for incoming air to duct contact, you can eventually get the outdoor air almost to the same point (dry bulb) as the ground temperature. This means that in September, if your duct was 13 feet below ground, you could get the air to about 60 degrees even if it is 90 F outside. Conversely, you could get the incoming air as high as 45 degrees (13 foot duct) in February, even if it is 0 degrees outside. Unfortunately, to change the temperature that much, you need longer duct runs. Assuming you need about 55 cfm of ventilation (2500 sf x 0.01 cfm/sf + 4 people x 7.5 cfm/person), the graph below shows what percentage of the temperature difference (between earth temperature and outside air temperature) you could make up with different diameter ducts and different lengths (I assumed square / rectangle ducts). This says that 20 meters of 0.1 x 0.1 duct would make up 90% of the difference between outdoor air and ground temperature. For example, when it was 0 degrees outside and 50 degrees in the ground in January, you could make up 45 degrees just from going through the duct.

It doesn’t look like fan power will be that big of a deal for you (if you’re providing 55 cfm), regardless of the distance. When I looked at the project in Durban we were trying to move 8,000 cfm and the fan power penalty was significant. It looks like you’d really only need a 1 watt of fan power (though you’ll probably have to get one bigger just because that is what is available). 1 x 365 days / year x 24 hours / day / 1000 Wh / kWh = 8.76 kWh per year (about $0.88 per year in fan energy). I’m only looking at 55 cfm as the ventilation requirement – this air isn’t meant to heat or cool.

Finally, the last thing you’d want to consider is condensation. The psychrometric chart below shows one dot for every hour of a typical year (8,760 dots) in South Bend.

The same chart below shows just the dots for a typical August. During this month, your ground temperature could be around 60 degrees (assuming 13 feet deep). During the hour that I’ve highlighted (point 1), the air temperature is about 87 degrees, 70% Rh. When you cool this down towards 60 degrees, you start to get condensation at about 76 degrees (point 2 – the air is now 100% Rh). By the time you get to point 3, you will have gone from 0.019 grains of water per pound of air to 0.011, with the water that is no longer in the air condensing out in your ducts. I honestly don’t know how big of a concern this is, but in a typical air conditioner you’d collect the condensation at a specific point and be able to deal with it. There may be concern about bacteria if you have standing water running the length of your ducts during the summer. You wouldn’t have to worry about this in the winter.

That’s all I have for now. If you have specific questions about your system, I might be able to do the calculations for you. I made a few assumptions in the calcs above (6 bends in each duct work, turbulent flow, concrete ducts for example) and adapted calculations we already had for a larger commercial system, so if we had a real system and started from scratch the numbers could be tightened up a bit, but I think this info is close. Thanks to Alejandra Menchaca, PhD and Director of Operations for the Boston offfice of EA Buildings, who did most of the original calculations for our project in Durban.

Nathan

Ground Source Heat Pump Question

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 21:04:00 +0000

EMAIL QUESTION ABOUT HEAT PUMPS
Wed, 6 Mar 2013

Hi Nathan, I am writing about our house in Lexington which my son and family are living in. He has contacted a firm who is planning to install heat pumps to heat/cool 2 floors of our split 3-level house. It is estimated to cost $20,000 with an interest free loan. I just am somewhat skeptical that heat can be supplied reasonably cheaply with electricity and heat pumps in this climate. I wonder if you are able to send me to appropriate literature or home owners who are using this equipment or perhaps give me your opinion. Sam

RESPONSE

Sam,

I usually think of GSHPs in terms of their coefficient of performance (COP). A good one can get around a COP of 4, meaning for every one unit of energy (electricity) you put in you get 4 units out as heat. According to the 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (http://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2009/index.cfm?view=consumption#end-use) the average house in Massachusetts uses 65,200,000 Btu of energy on heating per year (652 therms about $652 cost). Since most homes use a regular boiler or furnace of around 80%, I'd estimate they only need 52,192,000 Btu of heat (the other 20% is inefficiencies from the boiler). This is the same energy as 15,296 kWh. To get this from a GSHP with a COP of 4, you'd need 3,824 kWh of electricity (about $382 cost). Conversely, if you provided the same 52 MMBtu of heat with a 95% condensing boiler, you'd use 54,939,000 Btu of natural gas (549 therms and $549 cost). GSHPs will save some energy, but the payback is usually pretty long.

As to whether or not the GSHP will work in Boston, it definitely can. We used a lot at Harvard. I know a guy in Somerville who has one for his house (case study link below). Average ground temperature in Boston is about 50. At shallow depths it ranges between about 30 to 70 (see attached from Logan). The ground temperature usually lags behind the air temperature by a month or two (the coldest months for ground temp are a couple of months behind the coldest air months). Still more efficient than trying to use an air source heat pump where the delta T is greater and less in your favor.

The GSHP will also be more efficient than a typical air conditioner, but the annual air conditioning cost is less than the heating cost. Assume you could save 25% or so on your AC bill (say going from a COP of 3 to 4).

I hope this helps.

Nathan

Resources:

General Info - http://www.greenbuilding.com/knowledge-base/what-are-ground-source-heat-pumps

Somerville Case Study - http://www.greenbuilding.com/zero-energy-homes/case-study-retrofit-somerville-mass

Paper on Energy Modeling Barriers

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 19:05:00 +0000

Holly Samuelson and team at the Harvard Graduate School of Design recently presented a paper on "Identifying Non-Technical Barriers to Energy Model Sharing and Reuse". This is a topic dear to my heart as while I was at Harvard I chaired the Green Building Standards committee and wrote the language requiring all major renovation and new construction projects to submit as-built energy models in electronic format as part of their closeout documents. We also recommended projects to use eQuest or Energy Plus unless they had a defendable reason why one of these programs wasn't viable. As far as I know, this was the first such requirement and nobody really know how the industry would react. Holly and friends took this idea and surveyed 154 energy modelers to see what they thought about sharing energy models. A whopping 75% of the respondants indicated that they would share these files. Those that wouldn't share gave a range of reasons including (in decreasing order of prevalence) that the models are too complicated to be understood by others, the models don't represent reality in the finished building, the model itself represents intellectual property not to be shared, and finally a couple of engineers felt that owners do not have staff qualified to receive the model (though I'm sure this is almost universally the case). I spoke with Holly years ago when she was initially contemplating the paper and survey and she gave me a shout out in the acknowledgements for my help. She also acknowledged fellow EA TAG member Chris Schaffner (the Green Engineer). Thanks Holly and keep up the great work.

USGBC Blog Post ~ Project Haiti

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:19:00 +0000

I'm about to get married and my fiance and I would like to share our good fortune with others. We both support the USGBC Project Haiti project to address the health and emotional needs of orphaned children and provide a pathway to adoption in that country. What's more, the project plans to do all of this with a green buildling that can be a model for sustainable development in that country. We’ve found that our friends and family are equally inspired by this worthwhile cause. That being the case, we chose to donate to Project Haiti ourselves and include it in our wedding registry as an option for others to donate on our behalf. Here's the Project Haiti website: https://www.usgbc.org/Haiti/haiti.html

The USGBC recently asked me if I'd write a blog post for them about our decision. You can see the full post here: http://usgbcblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/best-way-to-celebrate-wedding.html

Water Cooler Timers

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:25:00 +0000

The following is a simple Energy Conservation Measure identified for a site in Mexico:

Existing Condition: Water Coolers on 24 Hours per Day
There are at least 10 bottled water dispensers, each of which consumes 1.45 kWh per day to heat and cool the water. These units continue to draw some energy during the evenings and weekends when nobody is in the building, consuming up to 5,293 kWh annually and costing 7,430 pesos ($619 U.S.).

Recommendation: Add Timers to Water Coolers
Add a simple programmable timer to each of the water coolers. The should be set to turn on when people are scheduled to first arrive at the building and turn off when the majority of people are scheduled to leave.

Assumptions:
It is assumed that a simple, 7 day, analog timer will be able to reduce annual energy consumption by at least 50%, saving 3,715 pesos ($310 U.S.) annually. It is assumed that these can be purchased for $15 U.S. (180 pesos) each, or $150 U.S. ($1800 pesos) total, and that no cost of labor is needed to install them.

All costs below in Pesos...

Electric Hand Dryers

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:09:00 +0000

Conservation Measure from Recent Utiliyt Audit - Electric Hand Dryers

Summary:
$2,000 first cost, $17,200 annual savings, less than 2 month simple payback.

Existing Condition: Paper Towels in Restrooms
There are at least 9 restrooms in the building, all of which have paper towels for hand drying. Historic purchasing records show that 30 units are purchased per week at $15.42 per unit for an annual spend of $23,125.

Recommendation: Electric Hand Dryers
Remove the paper towel dispensers from restrooms and install energy efficient electric hand dryers. A good hand dryer will use 1,500 W or less and require about 12 seconds to dry the user’s hands. The Xlerator is one such option and sells for $400. It is recommended to install electric hand dryers in the two large production area restrooms. Since 90% of the building users are in the production and warehouse areas, these areas will see the greatest savings. Since the payback will be longer in the office area restrooms and the electric hand dryers can be loud, it is not recommended that hand dryers be used in these areas at this time. Most units do not require special wiring and can be installed with in-house labor. Units can be purchased online at sites such as: http://www.restroomdirect.com/high_speed_hand_dryers.aspx

Assumptions:
It is assumed that 2 hand dryers are needed per restroom for each of the two large restrooms. The units are $400 each. It is assumed that labor and mounting costs will be an additional $100 U.S. for each unit or $500 total. The total cost will be $2,000. It is assumed all 1,900 production and warehouse workers will use the restrooms and the hand dryers 3 times per day for 250 days per year. The units will draw 1.5 kW and will run for 12 seconds per use (0.0033 hours) for a total annual electricity consumption of 7,125 kWh. At $0.12 per kWh, this is $855 per year. It is assumed that 75% of the total annual paper towel cost is attributed to the two large restrooms, which represents $18,038 annually.

Notes:
This measure was identified for a factory in Tijuana. All prices were converted from Pesos.

Residential GHG Reduction Plan

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Thu, 19 May 2011 16:37:00 +0000

Our ENVR 116: Getting to Carbon Neutrality class is finally over and the grades submitted. The class ended with student presentations on May 10, 2010. The presentations were amazingly good, summarizing the students' original greenhouse gas reduction plans. Most students chose to develop plans for their homes, while a few focused on businesses. The first presentation of the night from the local students was by Steve O'Flarity, who drove up from Connecticut. Steve set a goal of reducing his household GHG emissions for his 3,000 square foot home by 30% by 2014 from a 2010 baseline. He calculated his family of 4 emitted 28 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2010, including most Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions and the Scope 3 emissions from air travel. He identified a number of GHG mitigation opportunities for his household including driving less, replacing their furnace, and switching from an electric clothes dryer to a new gas dryer (adding to his Scope 1 emissions but reducing his overall emissions). Great job Steve and thanks for letting me share your presentation, though I'll have to wait to attach the file until I can access my FTP site from my home computer.

Greenhouse Gas Planning Interviews

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Thu, 19 May 2011 16:03:00 +0000

The class I co-teach at the Harvard Extension School, ENVR 116: Getting to Carbon Neutrality, just ended and as an extra credit assignment I had students interview professionals about their lessons learned in greenhouse gas planning. The details of the assignment are below. A number of the student interviews were really good and I learned a lot watching them. The first one I watched was Ian Hayes' phone interview (with still image) of Christoph Fuellemann, Environmental Delegate of Swiss International Airlines. He shares a lot of great experience related to trying to quantify and reduce emissions associated with the airline industry, including the contradiction between passengers wanting more space / leg room (fewer passengers per flight) and the desire to reduce emissions per passenger (more passengers per flight). According to Ian:

Mr. Fuellemann shares lessons learned from his experience at Swiss International Airlines, including how environmental advocates can be successful by pursuing opportunities that provide parallel financial and environmental benefits and be willing to make compromises with marketing to balance passenger service goals with emissions reduction targets.

All the interviews can be found here: http://vimeo.com/groups/envr116

ENVR 116 Extra Credit Assignment

Overview: Conduct, record, and summarize a short interview with somebody who has or may have in the future responsibility for developing a portion of a Climate Action Plan for an organization.

Purpose: Collect and share current best practices and lessons learned in developing Climate Action Plans, allowing others outside of the class as well as future classes to have access to this information.

Requirements: The interview must start with an introduction of the interviewee and a succinct description of their experience or familiarity with Climate Action Planning. The interview needs to include a description of a specific lesson learned or best practice in the field based on the experience of the interviewee. The idea is to identify any potential difficulties in the GHG planning process and hopefully some ways to overcome these difficulties and / or to share success stories of GHG planning processes that were successful. You may want to focus on issues with data collection, funding, staffing, reporting, stakeholder engagement, or any of the other pieces of a GHG reduction plan. Total time of the interview should be between three and five minutes.

Green Building Benefits

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:21:00 +0000

QUESTION:

Hello Nate,I hope all is well. I just had a class last night and one of the students is interested in doing a research paper on green building. I recall that this is your specialty - is that right? She is a bit lost and I can't help much with that subject. I was wondering if you could recommend any good books, or ideally, any good journal articles which discuss the economics of green building - ie. cost benefits analysis/ long term benefits. Anything you could suggest would be appreciated.

RESPONSE:

No problem. There aren't nearly as many resources on the cost effectiveness as I'd like to see, but I'll share what I know. The USGBC tries to collect all of this and has a list under "Research Publications" Here's the link: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=77

One of the sub-headings is "Cost Analysis of Whole Buildings". The 2009 Kats and the 2007 paper by Langdon are probably your best bets for general cost / benefits studies.

As for the value of green buildings, CoStar Advisor has put out some reports: http://www.costar.com/josre/doesGreenPayOff.htm

I think the New Buildings Institute has one as well, but I didn't find it in my quick search.

Here's one on the benefits of increased productivity: http://www.costar.com/uploadedFiles/JOSRE/JournalPdfs/04-Green-Buildings-Productivity.pdf

Here's another good one on financial benefits / feasibility of green buildings (globally focused): http://www.wbcsd.org/Plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?DocTypeId=25&ObjectId=MzQyMDQ

This should get your student started. The USGBC site has lots of papers, but I should warn you that they're a mix of quality, with very few being from peer reviewed journals. If she refines the research question a bit more (what component of green buildngs? energy efficiency? re-sale value? increased occupant comfort? reduced risk of cancer? which type of green building? commercial offices? schools? homes? etc.) feel free to contact me for additional info. Not really any good books on the benefits, but some decent ones on how to design / build a green building if she does a search on the subject.

Nathan

Selecting Low-Maintenance Plants

noreply@blogger.com (Nathan Gauthier) — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:50:00 +0000

Question:
Are you aware of a recognized standard that identifies "low-maintenance/indigenous" plantings for sustainable landscaping in different geographies?

Response:
I don’t know of any guide that identifies native / adapted vegetation (low-maintenance) for the entire US and was always at a loss when asked by a design team. Plant selection changes a lot based on region and even local microclimate. For the most part, anything local is always a safe bet. For adapted plants, you want something that doesn’t require much water, fertilizer, or maintenance and won’t get out of control. The general rule is also to avoid turf grass as much as possible and use lots of mulch. If you are putting the landscaping out to bid, you could include a performance requirement that says plants must be native to the area or require minimal maintenance, etc. The attached documents might help you define xeriscaping or a process each site should employ when selecting plants. For example, you could emphasize the 7 principles found here: http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/landscaping/index.cfm/mytopic=11960

This site is supposed to let you select water efficient plants, but I can’t get it to work: http://www.h2ouse.org/gardensoft/index.aspx

There are a few good sites for specific regions. For example:
Missouri: http://extension.missouri.edu/explorepdf/agguides/hort/g06912.pdf
Austin, TX: http://xeriscape.sustainablesources.com/
Colorado: http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/garden/07228.html

You might also want to check out one of these books:
“Landscape Plants for Western Regions: An Illustrated Guide to Plants for Water Conservation” http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0960598839/phoenixtropicalg/002-2301829-6294425
“Waterwise Landscaping with Trees, Shrubs, and Vines: A Xeriscape Guide for the Rocky Mountain Region, California, and the Desert Southwest” http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/096704510X/qid%3D1010441830/ref%3Dsr_11_0_1/002-2301829-6294425
“Plants for Natural Gardens: Southwestern Native & Adaptive Trees, Shrubs, Wildflowers & Grasses” http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/089013281X/ref=pd_sim_b_4/002-3622213-9240020?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

A good landscaper should be able to help you define this for your site (as should a good nursery):

Association of Professional Landscape Designers: http://www.apld.com/

American Society of Landscape Architects: http://online.asla.org/scriptcontent/index_find_firm.cfm

I hope this helps and good luck,
Nathan