Energy

1. Energy Conservation at EPA: Program and Projects Greening the GovernmentConference Philadelphia, Pa. June 2-4, 2003

2. Energy Conservation at EPA Program and Projects • EPA Facilities Overview • EPA How We Do It • EPA What We Do

3. EPA Facilities Overview National Office Perspective • EPA has approximately 160 facilities, and 56 large facilities; we house approximately 26,000 people in 9 million square feet of offices and laboratories.

4. EPA Facilities Overview

5. EPA Facilities Overview Energy Use in Laboratories vs. Office Buildings • Laboratories make up ~1/3 of EPA’s inventory but use 2/3 of our energy. • Labs have 100% outside air, while offices have recirculated air. • Labs use 3 to 6 times the energy of an office building. Space Use Energy Use

6. EPA Facilities Overview • How EPA acquires its buildings affects how utilities are paid and how energy use concerns are addressed. • Types of EPA buildings: • EPA owned • EPA leased private buildings • GSA owned and assigned to EPA • GSA leased private buildings

7. EPA: How We Do It National Energy Program Goal: Make EPA facilities as energy efficient as possible, given real estate interest, budget, and institutional constraints.

8. EPA’s National Energy Program Management Approaches • You Can’t Manage What You Don’t Measure • Energy data tracking • Identify problems, find opportunities, and set priorities • Energy E-mail • Disseminates information • Creates peer pressure

9. Share of Total Energy Use Total BTUs, FY 2005 (Green Power Not Netted Out) RTP (New, Main) - 37.6% RTP (New Page Rd.) - 0.2% Corvallis (WRS) - 0.3% Cincinnati (AWBERC) - 12.2% Cincinnati (Ctr Hill) - 0.4% Ada - 0.6% RTP (NHEERL) - 4.0% Newport - 0.6% Cincinnati (Test&Eval) - 0.8% RTP (Human Studies) - 4.0% Grosse Ile - 0.8% Montgomery - 1.2% Fort Meade - 4.9% Richmond - 1.2% Golden - 1.5% Ann Arbor - 4.0% Gulf Breeze - 1.6% Corvallis (Main) - 1.7% Edison - 2.9% Manchester - 1.8% RTP (NCC) - 1.8% Duluth - 2.6% Houston - 1.8% Chelmsford - 1.9% Athens - 2.6% Athens-ESD - 2.0% Las Vegas - 2.6% Narragansett - 2.4%

10. BTUs/GSF, E.O. 13123 FY 2005 Goal BTUs/GSF, Totals for RTP and Cincinnati BTUs/GSF, Conventional Power BTUs/GSF, Recommissioning Savings FY 2002 Energy Intensity Per Lab BTUs/GSF, E.O. 13123 FY 2010 Goal BTUs/GSF, ESPC Savings BTUs/GSF, Green Power 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 BTUs/GSF/FY 2002 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Ada Edison Duluth Golden Houston Newport Ann Arbor Grosse Ile Richmond Las Vegas Fort Meade Manchester Gulf Breeze Athens-ESD Chelmsford RTP (ERC) Montgomery Narragansett Corvallis (Main) Corvallis (WRS) RTP (Page Rd.) RTP (NHEERL) Cincinnati (Total) RTP (Old, Total) Cincinnati (Ctr Hill) Athens, GA (ORD) RTP (Annex/Admin) EO 13123 FY05 Goal RTP (Human Studies) EO 13123 FY10 Goal Cincinnati (AWBERC) Cincinnati (Test&Eval)

11. FY 2002 Energy Cost/GSF/Year $8.00 $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 Cost/GSF/Year $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 Ada Duluth Athens Golden Edison Houston Ann Arbor Richmond Newport Las Vegas Fort Meade Grosse Ile RTP (ERC) Gulf Breeze Manchester Montgomery Chelmsford Athens (ESD) Narragansett Cincinnati (Total) Corvallis (Main) RTP (NHEERL) RTP (Old, Total) Cincinnati (Ctr Hill) RTP (Page Rd.) Corvallis (WRS) RTP (Annex/Admin) Cincinnati (AWBERC) Cincinnati (Test&Eval) RTP (Human Studies)

12. EPA’s National Energy Program Management Approaches Continued • No new dogs in the inventory • EPA works diligently on all new major space procurements to make them energy efficient. • It’s never too early to think about energy efficiency • Type: Build to suit labs or offices, leased spaces, new construction. • Stage: master planning, procurement strategy, A/E selection, design, design review, controls review, energy modeling, construction, and commissioning all affect success.

13. EPA’s National Energy Program Management Approaches Continued • Institutional/Cultural Change • Better budgeting/priorities setting • Architectural/engineering firms • Master planning • Building and lease standards • Collaborative processes • Staff and management awareness

14. EPA’s National Energy Program Management Approaches Continued • Can’t Do It Alone • We can’t do projects without local champions

15. How EPA Manages Energy • Energy Reporting • New Building Review

16. How EPA Manages Energy • Energy Auditing—Tiered Approach • Energy Light Audits—every three years • Stage Two Audits • Detailed System Audits

17. How EPA Manages Energy • Commissioning, Re-Commissioning, Retro-Commissioning • Most cost-effective energy investment • Fort Meade cost $75-100K; saved $150K annually in energy costs • Absolutely for new buildings • Re-commissioning prevents building performance creep • Retro-commissioning commissions buildings that were never commissioned (e.g. Chapel Hill and NHEERL North Carolina)

18. How EPA Manages Energy • Mechanical Engineering Design and Construction—Conventional • These are long term projects, typically 2 to 4 years • Energy Savings Performance Contracts • Ann Arbor, Michigan • Ada, Oklahoma

19. How EPA Manages Energy • Green Power Procurement • Short term solution for our EO goals. • Right thing to do. • Green Power does cost a little more, generally. • We are not sophisticated enough yet to actively use it to stabilize our energy bills. • Examples: Richmond, Golden, Chelmsford, Cincinnati, Manchester, Houston, RTP (at 40%), Edison, Kansas City Science & Technology Center, Narragansett, Fort Meade.

20. Green Power vs. Green Tags Electricity Renewable energy generation “green power” Environmental attributes “green tags” • Avoided emissions (e.g., CO2, NOx, SO2) Credit: Jennifer Layke & Craig Hanson,World Resources Institute

21. Green Power as a Percentage of Total Reportable Energy Use

22. How EPA Manages Energy • ENERGY STAR Office Buildings • Message Projects • Send message—photovoltaics and other solar projects rarely pay for themselves. • GM Fuel Cell—HQ

23. Contact EPA Bucky Green Chief, Sustainable Facilities Practices Branch www.epa.gov/greeningepa