Transcript Sustainability and the Air Force

Sustainability at U.S. Military Facilities
Society of American Military Engineers, Savannah Post
13 December 2010
1
Outline
 Definitions
 Drivers
 Discussion Topics
 Questions
2
Definitions of Sustainability
Conventional Definitions
 Brundtland Commission
 “Development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.”
3

ISO
 “actions of an organization to take responsibility for the impacts of its
activities on society and the environment . . . based on ethical
behavior, compliance with law, and intergovernmental instruments,
and . . .integrated into the ongoing activities of an organization.”

Variations on this theme for the Services
 U.S. Army triple bottom line: mission, environment, and community
Drivers of Sustainability



4
Mandatory
 Presidential Executive Order 13514
 USEPA GHG Reporting Rule (40 CFR Part 98)
Stakeholder Interests
 Taxpayer
› Fiscally responsible: value creation and cost reduction
› Assured supply and price predictability
› Global sourcing and environmental justice issues
 Workforce needs and development
 Community Local approvals
The Environment
 Assured supply of natural resources: water, energy and materials
› Impact of climate change
Drivers
Presidential EO 13514
 Signed 10/05/2009
(Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance)
 Applicable to all Federal agencies,
except:
› Intelligence activities and related personnel, resources, and facilities
› Law enforcement activities of Federal agencies
› Other exemptions on national security grounds
 Applicable to all Federally owned or operated vehicles, vessels,
aircraft, or non-road equipment, except:
›
›
›
›
Combat, tactical, and associated training
Federal law enforcement
Emergency response (including fire and rescue)
Spaceflight vehicles (including associated ground-support equipment)
 Builds on Executive Order 13423
› Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation
Management (2007)
5
Section of EO 13514
Goal
Due from
date of EO
(10/5/09)
(a) Greenhouse gas
(GHG) reductions
Set percentage reduction targets (FY2008 baseline) for Scope 1 & 2*emissions:
(i) Energy intensity reduction
(ii) Renewable energy increase
(iii) Fossil fuel decrease
90 days
(b) GHG reductions
Set percentage reduction targets (FY2008 baseline) for Scope 3* emissions:
(i) Supply chain (vendors/contractors)
(ii) Commuting & travel
240 days
(c) GHG inventory
Scopes 1-3* for FY2010; then annually thereafter
15 months
(d) Water use
(i)
Potable water consumption intensity: reduce by 2% annually through FY2020 or
26% by end of FY2020 (FY2007 baseline)
(ii) Industrial, landscaping, agricultural water consumption: reduce by 2% annually
through FY2020 or 20% by end of FY2020 (FY2010 baseline)
(iii) Potable water consumption: Identify, promote, implement water reuse strategies
None listed
(e) Pollution prevention,
waste elimination
(i)
None listed
(f) Advanced local and
regional planning
(iv) Identify and analyze impacts from energy usage and alternative energy sources in
all EISs and EAs for proposals for new or expanded Federal facilities under NEPA
None listed
(g) Federal building
design, construction,
O&M, deconstruction
(i)
None listed
(h) Sustainable
acquisition
Ensure that 95% of new contract actions (except weapons systems) are energyefficient, water-efficient, biobased, environmentally preferable, non-ozone depleting,
contain recycled content, and/or are non-toxic or less-toxic alternatives
None listed
(i) Electronics
stewardship
EPEAT/FEMP/Energy Star procurement preference, power management, duplex
printing, disposition, best practices for data center management
None listed
(j) Environmental mgmt
Continued implementation of environmental management systems
None listed
(ii)
Diversion of at least 50% of non-hazardous, non-construction debris by end of
FY2015
Starting FY2020, ensure that all new Federal buildings entering the planning
process are designed to achieve zero net energy by FY2030
Cost-effective, innovative strategies, e.g., reflective and vegetative roofs
Presidential EO 13514 – Greenhouse Gas Reporting
7
Drivers
Scope
Sub-Category
Examples
Scope 1: Direct
emissions from
combustion at
facility
Stationary
On-site boilers, turbines, furnaces,
process heaters
Mobile
Vehicles, vessels, aircraft, off-road
equipment
Process
Dry ice, other processes directly using
GHGs
Fugitive
Refrigerant leakage
Scope 2: Indirect
emissions
Purchased utilities (i.e.,
not produced on-site)
Purchased electricity, steam, heat,
chilled water
Scope 3: Other
indirect emissions
Employee commuting,
official travel
Travel using non-facility vehicles,
vessels, aircraft
Solid waste
Waste sent to landfills
Supply chain
Emissions in manufacture/ transport/
use/ disposal of procured products
USEPA Rulemaking


8
Drivers
USEPA Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule
 Applicable to all facilities (including military) with emissions of
≥25,000 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MTCO2E/yr)
› Military: General stationary combustion only
› Civilian: Stringent requirements for certain types of industries and
suppliers
 Use of different reporting tiers based on energy output and fuel type
 GHG tracking to begin 01/01/2010
› First report to USEPA due 03/31/2011
USEPA Endangerment Finding
 Follow up to 04/02/07 Supreme Court ruling – CO2 as “air pollutant”
 Gives USEPA authority to regulate CO2 emissions under the Clean Air
Act
Discussion Topics
Buildings (LEED)
Sustainable
Deconstruction
Sustainable
Remediation
Water & Waste
Energy &
Carbon
9
Sustainability
Compliance
Energy and Carbon - Inventory
Fugitive
Sources
3%
Baseline Inventory
Stationary
Sources
19%
Purchased
Electricity
63%
Business
Travel
4%
60,000
50,000
Mobile
Sources 10%
40,000
30,000
Solid Waste
1%
20,000
10,000
0
Emissions Forecasting and Stabilization Wedges
• Building envelope
• HVAC
• Lighting Improvements
• Improved Energy
Metering
• Water Conservation
• Continuous
Commissioning
• Process Improvements
• CHP & Distributed
Power
Emissions
(metric tons
CO2E)
180000
120000
• Central Plant Biomass
Conversion
• On-site Wind
• On-site Photovoltaics
• Biogas
0
2050
2007
Year
13
Buildings
Aaron Davis Hall
Howard E. Wille Administration
Building
Baskerville Hall
Compton/Goethels Hall
Shiff House Day Care Center
Harris Hall
3.14.4. Provide Continual Health and Safety Evaluations
3.14.3. Provide Training
3.14.2. Remove Abandoned Equipment
Controls
3.14.1. Repair Leaks
3.4.3. Provide Fan Cycling
3.4.2. Provide Night Setback Controls
HVAC
3.4.1. Address Comfort Issues
3.3.6. Provide Exhaust Air Heat Recovery
3.3.5. Upgrade Data Center and Computer Lab HVAC
Lighting
3.3.3. Add or Fix Automatic Outside Air Economizers
3.3.2. Remove Reheat Controls
3.3.1. Add Demand Control Ventilation (DCV)
3.2.5. Control Exterior Lighting
3.2.4. Add Occupancy Sensors
3.2.3. Add Day Lighting Controls
Envelope
3.2.2. Reduce Night Time Lighting
3.2.1. Improve Lighting Efficiency
3.1.4. Reduce Air Infiltration
3.1.3. Provide Additional Insulation
3.1.2. Upgrade Windows
3.1.1. Upgrade to Sustainable Roofing materials
Example Energy Assessment
Operation and
Maintenance
Identifying Potential Energy Conservation Measures

16
Alternative / renewable energy opportunities
 Waste heat recovery
 Cogeneration / CHP
 Backpressure steam turbines
 Absorption chillers
 Solar photovoltaics (PV)
 Solar thermal
 Wind energy
 Biogas
ECM Cost/Benefit Analysis
Project Subcategory
Existing Buildings: Equipment Replacements and
Retrofits
ECM 1: Lighting Fixtures and Controls
ECM 8: Replace Pneumatic Domestic Water
Supply System
(Marshak)
ECM 9: Upgrade Laboratory Fume Hoods and
Controls
(Marshak and Steinman Halls)
ECM 11: Shepard Hall HVAC Renovation
Existing Buildings: Other Capital Measures
ECM 3: Campus-wide DDC Building Automation
System
ECM 10: Building Envelope Improvements
Existing Buildings: Operations and Maintenance
ECM 4: Recommission Central Chiller Plant
Controls
ECM 5: HVAC System Retro-Commissioning
(Compton-Goethals and Baskerville Halls)
ECM 6: Steam Trap Maintenance Program
Clean Distributed Generation
ECM 7: Boiler Heat Recovery
Total
Annual Energy Cost
Annual CO2e
Investment Cost
Savings
Reductions
$ mil % of total $ mil % of total MT eCO2 % of total
8.00
15.2%
0.61
21.4%
2,065
17.9%
0.08
0.1%
0.004
0.1%
12
0.1%
31.79
0.75
60.2%
1.4%
0.83
0.02
28.9%
0.7%
3,629
76
31.4%
0.7%
7.00
4.50
13.3%
8.5%
0.74
0.18
26.0%
6.3%
3,110
752
26.9%
6.5%
0.12
0.2%
0.22
7.6%
738
6.4%
0.15
0.3%
0.02
0.7%
72
0.6%
0.15
0.3%
0.22
7.6%
1,006
8.7%
0.25
52.79
0.5%
100.0%
0.02
2.87
0.7%
100.0%
96
11,556
0.8%
100.0%
Discussion Topics
Fort Eustis, Virginia (Army)
 Baseline Carbon Footprint  Available Data Sources




Stationary Emissions
Mobile Emissions
Purchased Electricity
Solid Waste
 Fuel Use
 Fuel Use
 Utility Data
 Waste Disposal Data
 Evaluation of Mitigation Efforts



19
Recycling
Partial Solid Waste Diversion to Waste to Energy Plant instead of
Landfill
9% Reduction in Carbon Footprint through Mitigation
Pope AFB, North Carolina
20
Discussion Topics

Repair Control Tower
 Conversion from electric heat to the central steam systems using a
steam to hot water heat exchanger
 Installation of DDC controls with energy management capabilities
 Installation of exterior insulation and finish systems to reduce heating
and cooling costs

Renovation of Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron Buildings
 Boiler conversion from oil to more efficient gas-fired burner
 Energy efficient lighting replacement
 DDC controls with energy management capabilities
 Gas-fired makeup air units
Projects at Military Installations
Buildings & Facilities (LEED)
Projects at Military Installations
Fort Carson, Colorado – U.S. Army’s first LEED Gold facility







23
Mitigate impact of growth in
the military
30% reduction in energy use
Improved insulation
Reflective Roof
Lighting power density
reduction
CO2 sensors for demand
control ventilation
Variable speed chiller
Water & Waste

Source minimization, reuse, and recycle

Water and Sewer Usage


Discussion Topics
Are you doing everything possible to minimize the use of water at your Base
(e.g., waterless devices or low-flow fixtures), along with the resulting waste
streams associated with water use?
Printing and Packaging
Can you reformulate your printed materials and packaging to eliminate all but
the absolutely necessary elements and utilize recycled materials?
 Are all printers configured for double-sided and reduced size printing?


Waste Minimization and Commodity Management
Do you have a comprehensive waste minimization policy and program?
 Do you have effective programs in place to recover and recycle or reuse
valuable commodities and reduce solid waste streams?

24
McGuire AFB, New Jersey
Projects at Military Installations
 Water Recycle System


25
Design of complete, stand alone recycle systems for two vehicle wash
racks to:
› reduce discharge to the sanitary system
› conserve water (used for washing) due to a Base-mandated goal for
overall reduction
~60,000 gal/yr saved for sanitary and water combined
Procurement & Supply Chain

Discussion Topics
EO 13514
Ensure that 95% of new contract actions (except weapons systems) are
energy-efficient, water-efficient, biobased, environmentally preferable, nonozone depleting, contain recycled content, and/or are non-toxic or less-toxic
alternatives
 Procurement

What are your primary purchases?
 Are there alternative materials that are more environmentally friendly and
provide no worse than a cost-neutral comparison to current materials?
 Are you using recycled materials wherever possible?
 Have you asked your suppliers to provide environmentally friendly options
or alternatives where feasible?
 Supply Chain Consideration

Can you spell out your sustainability-related requirements?
 Can you incentivize/influence your suppliers to meet these requirements?

26
Discussion Topics
Sustainability through “de-construction”

Deconstruction is the process of dismantling a building in order to
salvage components for reuse and recycling

Fundamentally change notions about commerce and its role in shaping
future
Demolition
Deconstruction
Highly Mechanized
Labor Intensive
Capital Intensive
Low-Tech
Waste Generating
Material Reuse
Deconstruction is the sustainability preferred option.
27
Wright Patterson AFB
Projects at Military Installations
 “Team Wright Patt” Sustainability Project
Project: Deconstruction of Green Acres housing complex
Objective: Minimize environmental footprint of demolition by repurposing much of the site material, including –
28

1000+ ceiling fans

Garage doors

Windows

“Soft goods” (sinks, fixtures, toilets)

Water heaters

Furnaces & HVAC

Cabinetry
Sustainable Remediation
Discussion Topics
 Environmental cleanup that is able to
 evaluate whether benefits outweigh remediation costs;
 ensure the environmental impact of the remediation
activity is less than the impact of leaving the land
untreated;
 engage all stakeholders in the decision-making process;
 minimize or eliminate energy and natural resources
consumption;
 reduce or eliminate releases to the environment;
 harness or mimic natural processes;
 use renewable energy sources; and
 use recyclable materials.
29
Sustainable Remediation
 Traditional Cover
 Estimated GHG emissions
›
›
Soil cover = 17,000 tons CO2
Geomembrane cover = 11,000 tons CO2
 Alternative Cover
 Estimated GHG emissions
› Willows cover = -11,000 tons CO2
30
Discussion Topics
Sustainable Remediation
 Mechanical dredging and off-site disposal
 Estimated GHG emissions = 56,000 tons CO2
 Hydraulic dredging and on site disposal
 Estimated GHG emissions = 49,000 tons CO2
 Hydraulic Dredging, Green Electric Power,
and On-Site Disposal
 Estimated GHG emissions = 30,000 tons CO2
31
Discussion Topics
EO Compliance

32
Discussion Topics
EO 13123 Compliance Study - Robins AFB, Georgia
EO 13123 required that all DOD facilities:
1. Reduce their energy consumption by 20% by the year 2005;
2. Increase production flexibility by reconfiguring or upgrading the
facility infrastructure to maximize utility and space flexibility and to
accommodate the continually variable operations of this facility;
3. Lower maintenance costs through the repair or replacement of
facility equipment

Capital and 20-year life cycle implementation costs used

Assessments conducted:
› Potential to incorporate green products into the renovation
› Impact to facility’s LEED score through the application of various
renovation scenarios
Mark Wenclawiak/ [email protected]
Maureen Hoke / [email protected]
33
34