Morgan,

The closing report is attached for your review.

The celebration for Barton (and the organization team) is May 7th in Clark hall rooms A&B from 6-7 pm,

The trophies are ordered and scheduled to be given to building team captains at the celebration.

~Paul Foote

"The results here indicate that the changes to the UIUC network do in fact improve connectivity over the existing network. Moreover, the planned network lowers the average shortest-distance path between libraries, dormitories, and the Union by nearly the same amount as a control scenario without paths at all. While we may assume that a bicycle master plan will address and improve connectivity as a matter of course – and the language in the plans claims that they do – it seems counterintuitive that this simple test not be included in the research process to confirm that this is so. Ultimately what these accessibility and connectivity analyses show is that while planners and bicycle advocates may seek to improve bicycle infrastructure, we need a way to quantify and subsequently verify that any changes will improve the functionality of the network and the ease with which a rider can travel from one location to another." -- Pildes, Russell. (2014) "Connectivity and Accessibility of UIUC Campus Bike Paths", B.A. Honors Thesis, Department of Geography and Geographic Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

In collaboration with Facilities & Services, iSEE is establishing six teams consisting of faculty, staff, and students to examine the six broad themes within the Illinois Climate Action Plan.  The teams are currently finalizing assessments of how the campus is doing in meeting its pre-2015 iCAP targets. 

In the near future, the SWATeams will transition into recommending concrete steps the campus should take to meet its iCAP targets, as well as developing suggested revisions to the iCAP.  A procedure is currently being finalized within the campus administration to evaluate and endorse SWATeam recommendations; more details should be available soon.

Each SWATeam, once fully populated, will have two faculty members (one serving as chair), two staff members, and two students.  Each team also has an iSEE intern serving as a "clerk" for the group.  In the near future, each SWATeam will also populate a "consultation group" of experts and stakeholders across campus to provide input and feedback to the SWATeam.

The current membership of the SWATeams (clerks shown in square brackets) is:

From: Lev, James R
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 3:52 PM
To: Bartels, Bart A
Cc: Johnston, Morgan B; Architecture Review Committee
Subject: RE: Reycling in the Quad

Bart,

ARC approves of the new recycling program using the two containers at 30 Quad locations. We understand that this is an experimental program to encourage recycling.   Please keep us informed as to the success of the program. 

Jim

Present:

Fred Hahn, Doris Reeser, Brian Deal, Claire McConnell, Karl Helmink, Josh Whitson, Dhora Patel, Kevin Duff, Eva Sweeney

Campus needs a comprehensive Energy Conservation Master Plan.  The SAIC report is now outdated, and the Utilities Master Plan focuses on generation, not conservation.

It can be difficult to balance energy conservation goals with programmatic needs.  Some examples:

Illinois Plumbing Code still limits our ability to pursue gray-water systems Historic Preservation of building exteriors impacts building envelope improvements Facility Standards call for buildings designed for a 100 year life.  Is this appropriate in all cases?

Life Cycle Analysis of buildings - not merely cost analysis but including program benefits, social, etc Can researchers be persuaded to e.g. run experiments at night to save peak energy costs?

Need to "connect the dots" with departments and budgets so that energy and programmatic needs are both met

Need greater involvement from Space Planning, especially for the Net Zero Square Foot goal

How much low hanging fruit is left?  Energy conservation so far has been ahead of schedule but will become more difficult as we go.  Most felt that achieving 30% reduction is "easy", 50% not so easy, >50% is difficult.

Can we truly achieve net zero carbon?  Research activities will necessarily produce emissions and use energy.

ASHRAE 90.1-2010 is now state law; this raises the bar significantly for building energy efficiency on all projects

LEED Platinum also raises the bar starting 2015.  One challenge is that connection to our central plant utilities limits every project's ability to earn energy points, due to Abbott fossil fuel use.  Other points must be pursued.

Goals set should be high, because this spurs investment in projects to achieve them.  We have seen the results of this already with significant increase in energy conservation funding due to iCAP.

Fume Hoods remain a major opportunity for savings, but departments need incentives to upgrade or remove.

Otherwise they will keep existing fume hoods "just in case".  Possibly implement utility fee per fume hood?

** Decentralized billing for utility consumption is a major priority.  Units need to be stakeholders in energy savings, if they can reap the benefits they will make more efforts to conserve.

Increase transparency/outreach so campus community can see progress.  Energy Dashboards, etc.

DIA involvement should be increased (Memorial Stadium, Assembly Hall) as they are a large energy user.

** Net Zero Space initiative was discussed.  Currently the iCAP targets do not align with the Campus Master Plan which shows overall growth.  Space Planning needs to be involved.

Currently, departments have no incentive to give up unused or underused space.  Many buildings have space that could be utilized more fully rather than construct new. 

Space Planning needs much more involvement in general, this can reduce construction of new space, save energy and construction costs.  Currently, F&S Planning asks units to justify space needs, but this process is not robust.  Nobody has authority to say "no".

Some individuals have 3 or more private offices assigned to them around campus--wasting space.

Increase shared offices, hoteling, teleconference, etc.

Implement some kind of "rent" on building space would provide incentive to downsize?

For reference, regular building maintenance is approx. $2.50/sq.ft. exclusive of energy.

I just want to let you know that the RecycleMania Game Day results have been released.  Here is the overview:

• Over 100 volunteers participated.
• As far as the RecycleMania Results go:
  • Diversion Rate was 31.5% ranking 19th overall.
  • Per Capita Recycling was .041 pounds per person ranking 24th overall.
  • Waste Generation was .13 pounds person ranking 6th overall.
• Weights were:
  • 1180 pounds of landfill
  • 542 pound of recycling

For all the details go to: http://recyclemaniacs.org/gamedayresults

Thanks so much for your help and willingness to collaborate on this. 

Cheers,

Bart

From: Mies, Timothy A
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 4:54 PM
To: Halverson, Robert; Ben McCall <campus-sustainability@illinois.edu> (campus-sustainability@illinois.edu) (campus-sustainability@illinois.edu); Johnston, Morgan B; Rajagopalan, Nandakishore
Subject: Quick summary and highlights from Marc's visit

Just a quick summary of the discussions that occurred with Marc Caluwe from Caluwe Biomass  Heating Solutions in MA, US.

Heizomat is the manufacturer that Marc is a representative for in the US.  I have several brochures that I can pass along that have details on the product line including the RHK-AK model that Marc recommended.  Key points of interest for this group in selecting / approving a boiler:

• This unit utilizes a drag chain conveyor across the burn bed to handle / stir the material as it burns until dropping into an automatic ash clean out.
• We discussed what emissions controls would be needed, and Marc indicated that would be a decision campus would have to address.  Marc will be forwarding a brochure that compares emissions values from several manufacturers in the UK.  Options in order of cost would be a cyclone and then an electrostatic reciprocator.
• UL certification on this model is pending in approx. May of this year.  Due to the cost of ASME certification, they do not plan on testing to that standard.  Instead, in the US they run the boilers at atmospheric pressure with a vent on top.  In this configuration, a plate heat exchanger would be used between the boiler and a thermal storage tank (they recommend old propane tanks as acceptable).  The boilers when used in EU are rated and run at 2 bar (30psi).  Marc cited National Board Synopsis NB370 (http://www.nationalboard.org/index.aspx?pageID=409) that farms would be exempt from this requirement to run at atm.,  but universities / state / industry would not be.  It would be nice to get confirmation of this from engineering.
• The boiler recommended has an infinite turndown ration (VFD on blowers) to 10% and then shuts down.  A hot air ignition system in used for lighting / relighting.
• When running on MXG, in order to minimize clinker caused by low melting point of ash, a lower operating temperature is required, also requiring an 30% approx. upsize  in the model to get the rated output.  If we want 200Kw, we need to consider stepping up to a 250Kw model.
• Material handling / storage / feeding was discussed at length, and Marc was going back to Heizomat to get their recommendations for the best system.  Heizomat does not offer a bale processor at this time, but has a bulk bin feed system to collect chopped material to be burned.

Marc indicated that he would provide estimates (hopefully  by Friday noon) on a boiler system including a storage feed system, and also the same system installed in a cargo container, prewired, plumbed, etc.

In addition to the discussions with Mark, Luis Rund presented a very nice plan / rendering of a cargo container size boiler housing that had glass fronts on one half for viewers, and the other half a biomass storage container.  Probably out of our price range at this point, but would make a nice travel display for shows, demos, etc.

I also had a call later in the day from a representative of Biomass Energy Solutions in MO who is a sales rep for Uniconfort  (Italy) and we had very similar discussions on running at atmospheric pressures.  More literature is coming, and Jared Findley with BES forwarded some links I had looked at initially for the bale processors used for animal feedlots. 

Let me know if you have any further questions or need clarification on above.

Tim

see file

Dear SWATeam Members, A couple of important reminders and points:

1. Next Monday, starting at 9am is the iCAP Forum, to be held in the Illini Union Rooms A & B. Please join us for whatever time you are available that morning, so you can interact with members of the campus community and get their insights/feedback.
2. Each team will need to present a <5 minute presentation on their assessment. Hopefully each team has already decided who will be its representative? These presentations will begin around 9:30.
3. There are a lot of exciting Earth Week events you may wish to attend -- see http://sustainability.illinois.edu/earthweek2014.html
4. I would greatly appreciate it if you could send me at least a draft of your assessment by tomorrow, so that I can begin the process of putting together a poster for Monday afternoon's symposium.
5. Campus is still finalizing a procedure to handle recommendations from the SWATeams, but we are converging on this.

Once Earth Week is complete, I look forward to engaging your teams in broader discussions of where the campus should be going, and revising the iCAP itself. I hope that the teams can remain active over the summer (if at a more relaxed pace), using Skype as necessary. Thanks again for all your hard work!

Cheers,

Ben