GALLONS SAVED & SHARED PROJECT - Home - ISTC · GALLONS SAVED & SHARED PROJECT ... 爀屲Installed...
49
GALLONS SAVED & SHARED PROJECT Funded by the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, a division of the Prairie Research Institute at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1
Transcript of GALLONS SAVED & SHARED PROJECT - Home - ISTC · GALLONS SAVED & SHARED PROJECT ... 爀屲Installed...
GALLONS SAVED & SHARED PROJECT Funded by the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, a division of the Prairie Research Institute at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
1
INTRODUCTION
This presentation shares the experience of a 2014/15 project to reduce water consumption through three primary initiatives Water Fixture Retrofits Behavior Change Campaign in Residence Halls Laboratory Fixture Retrofits
This initiative was inspired by a series of student projects including building-level audits and other non-water behavior change campaigns
2
CONSERVATION ON CAMPUS
It is important to recognize that many of your campuses may already be doing quite a bit to conserve water In the process of implementing this project, we learned that many
halls had already underwent some level of retrofit The auditing of existing fixtures is a good project to be
conducted by students But should be verified by facilities’ staff
Scenarios for more efficient equipment can be developed by students But facilities engineers are best equipped to determine
appropriate fixtures given the use and abuse that can take place Trialing equipment in a small number of locations is very
effective in testing installation and effectiveness
3
BACKGROUND
4
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Discussion on normalizing water use. Complicating factors (campus acreage, residences, resource intensive spaces – labs, recreation spaces, etc.)
5
Presenter
Presentation Notes
At Loyola, when we break this out by use (a bit of a coarse breakdown) we see clearly our focus on residence halls.
WHERE TO AUDIT?
Per Bed
Per Area
6
Presenter
Presentation Notes
This is an example of how we prioritized what residence halls to work on. You can see the use and cost normalized by the number of students in each hall OR the square footage of each hall.
PART 1 – RESIDENCE HALL RETROFITS
7
BACKGROUND
Following a series of student-led water audits, residence halls were identified as potential retrofit opportunities.
This project provided the funding and impetus to engage facility staff in confirming retrofit needs.
8
Presenter
Presentation Notes
We recognized there was an opportunity to dive deeper into the water use at the building level, focusing on the residence halls. Not only is this what the data suggested but students are also much more engaged in working on and making recommendations for buildings that they have a deeper connection to. There were many discussions about how water is actually used in these buildings that were helpful learning opportunities for staff and for the students. We have a set of classes that require this kind of engaged learning that we can “pitch” these kind of opportunities to each year. We may not get everything we want and the quality of the research can vary but it is a good opportunity to collect basic data. While the sustainability office had wanted to address water consumption for a few years, this grant and the existing audit data gave us a solid reason to move from idea to action.
WHERE TO AUDIT?
Per Bed
Per Area 9
Presenter
Presentation Notes
This is an example of how we prioritized what residence halls to work on. You can see the use and cost normalized by the number of students in each hall OR the square footage of each hall.
STUDENT AUDITS
Water audits are simple data collection efforts that can be delegated to students.
Minimal equipment is required. Important information to be collected is Brand and
Name of fixture, Actual flow rate of fixture, Location and quantity of fixtures, Observations (perceived leaks or clearly deferred maintenance).
Although best confirmed by facility staff and engineers, a student audit can be a good way to identify potential retrofits.
See the resource section at the end for more resources on conducting water audits.
10
SUMMARY OF RETROFITS
Faucet Aerators – 356 Dual Flush Valves – 218 Urinal Valves - 12 Showerheads – 133 Toilets – 40 Faucets – 8
11
INTERVENTIONS INSTALLED
Fluidmaster 550 DFRK Installed dual flush
conversions on tank toilets in 6 residential buildings
Fits Toto and Gerber toilets but not American Standard
Cost: $25 – 30 Vendor: Martin Supply
Company Saves 45% more water
12
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.fluidmaster.com/our-products/toilet-flush-valves-dual-flush-converter-toilet-repair-kits/duo-flush-system.html http://www.fluidmaster.com/water-conservation/duo-flush-system http://www.totousa.com/entrada%E2%84%A2-close-coupled-round-toilet-128gpf Installed in Marquette, Fairfield, Xavier, Seattle, Arrupe, Gonzaga
INTERVENTIONS INSTALLED
Sloan WES212A Dual Flush Handle Converted single flush valves
into dual flush in residence hall 1.6 gpf for solids 1.1 gpf for liquids Cost: $35 – 45 Vendor: Martin Supply Company Saves 45% - 65% water per
flush
13
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.sloanvalve.com/Specifications/WES-212.pdf Installed in Georgetown
INTERVENTIONS INSTALLED
Toto CST 243ER-01 Installed new toilets in 2
residence halls 1.28 gallons per flush Cost: $125 - $150 Vendor: Martin Supply Company Saves 56% amount of water
14
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.totousa.com/entrada%E2%84%A2-close-coupled-round-toilet-128gpf Installed at Fordham
INTERVENTIONS INSTALLED
Faucets & Aerators Replaced leaking faucets Installed aerators (.5 gpm) Faucet cost: $220 Faucet vendor: Air Delights Aerator Cost: $2.55 each Aerator Vendor: Conservation
Warehouse Water savings vary by water pressure
15
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.airdelights.com/500484--Milano-AutoFaucet-SST-kit-with-mixing-valve-and-4-trim-plate-.html http://www.conservationwarehouse.com/pca-spray-05-gpm-faucet-aerator-regular-size.html Installed at Lewis and Corboy
INTERVENTIONS INSTALLED
Autoflush Toilets & Urinals Vendor: Air Delights Cost: $170 - $175 Water savings vary by
application
16
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.airdelights.com/401186--HyQ-AutoFlush-for-Urinals-Chrome.html http://www.airdelights.com/specification/AF_New_spec_sheet.pdf
INTERVENTIONS INSTALLED
High Efficiency Showerheads Vendor: Peoples Gas Cost: $15 Water savings vary by application
17
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.airdelights.com/401186--HyQ-AutoFlush-for-Urinals-Chrome.html http://www.airdelights.com/specification/AF_New_spec_sheet.pdf
PART 2 – BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
18
RESIDENCE HALL PARTICIPATION 7 apartment style residence halls were chosen with water
fixtures that have not been retrofitted We divided the halls into groups of about the same size.
Group 1: retrofit and behavior change – Fairfield Hall Group 2: retrofit only – Marquette Hall Group 3: behavior change only – Georgetown, Spring Hill Group 4: none of the above (control) – Canisius, Seattle, Xavier
Halls
19
TIMELINE FOR SURVEY & RETROFITS
In Fall of 2014, all 580 students were emailed an electronic survey to assesses their behavior knowledge, values, and attitudes. A $3 gift card to a local coffee shop was the incentive. The response rate was 48%
In Fall of 2014, we piloted the installation of various retrofits in the residence halls
In late Fall of 2014, the behavior campaign began in the identified residence halls
In Winter Break of 2014 / 15, the majority of the retrofits were installed
In Spring of 2015 the campaign continued and a second survey took place
In late Spring of 2015 a small number of other retrofits were installed
20
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
Jan 2015 – water conserving pledge was distributed
21
Signed water pledges displayed in residence hall entrance
22
EDUCATIONAL STICKERS
Educational stickers were placed in the shower and on retrofitted toilets.
23
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
Jan 2015 – water conserving posters were placed in key areas in residence halls of Group 1 and 3
24
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
Jan 2015 – A “Welcome Back” goody bag was placed in front of each apartment for students upon their return after winter break.
The goody bag includes dish soap and toothpaste for each student.
The dish soap and toothpaste highlighted a campus celebrity – Sister Jean – modeling water conserving behavior.
25
26
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
In Feb 2015, we gave two educational, interactive water presentations to students.
27
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
Students carried a 5-gallon bucket of water ¼ of mile to experience how many Africans need to carry their daily water use to their home.
28
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
∗ In February, we took down the previous batch of posters and put up a new batch in key areas.
29
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
∗ In March, we took down the previous batch of posters and put up the third and final batch of posters.
30
BEHAVIOR CHANGE CAMPAIGN
In April, we conducted a second round of electronic surveys. The survey incentive was a $5 gift certificate to Amazon or Target. Additionally, students were entered to win a Jambox bluetooth stereo if they completed the survey. The response rate was 52%.
31
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.k55.ch/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/j/a/jambox_black.jpg
PART 3 – LAB RETROFITS
32
WATERSENSE FAUCETS
2 faucets in the Clean Energy Lab used 3 gallons per min
Installed 2 WaterSense faucets that uses 1.5 gallons per min
33
Presenter
Presentation Notes
http://www.homedepot.com/p/MOEN-Kleo-Single-Hole-Single-Handle-Mid-Arc-Bathroom-Faucet-in-Chrome-84900/203179468?N=5yc1vZbrg2Z2bctgz#specifications
RECIRCULATING PUMPS
24 hoods in a Chemistry lab run experiments with room temperature water that could be recirculated instead.
Water aspirators are not used. Water flows through glass condensers, which is
attached to a larger glassware setup containing hot vapors.
These hot vapors that come in contact with the cooled glass walls from the running water are returned to liquid state.
34
Presenter
Presentation Notes
1) What are we condensing? various organic solvents... hexane, toluene, isopropanol are some examples. BPs probably range between 40-140 deg C. 2) How much of it are we condensing? no more than 25 mL for any one experiment. 3) Over what period of time? about 60-90 mins each experiment. 4) What temperature would we want the fluid to be? Usually be room temperature, but certain experiments may require us putting ice in the bath to cool it a bit. 2) We aren’t using water aspirators in our current setup. We have the water flowing around through glass condensers, which is attached to a larger glassware setup containing hot vapors. These hot vapors come in contact with the cooled glass walls from the running water are returned to liquid state. �3) As for temperature, we just need to have cold water in the holding tank, so no need for an external heater or anything. �4) Water use: �1 L/min � �1L/min �24 x 1L/min x 90 min (duration of experiment) = 2160 L per section � �2160 L x 14 sections = 30,240 L/wk (~8k gals) � �~6 - 7 labs per year �~200,000 L/yr (~50,000 gal) � �The lab instructor found a video that shows a very simple version of what she had in mind: �http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3b8cuMpBcQ0 � �This is a very simplified version, and we don't want so many open buckets of water just sitting around on the floor in the lab, but it gives you a sense of what we are thinking.
RECIRCULATING PUMPS
Solution: use portable recirculating pumps
During experiments, the pump will be taken out and attached to glass condensers.
Vendor: VWR Cost: $70 each Saves ~50,000 gallons/year
Recirculating Pump 14" L x 12" W x 4" H
35
Presenter
Presentation Notes
1) What are we condensing? various organic solvents... hexane, toluene, isopropanol are some examples. BPs probably range between 40-140 deg C. 2) How much of it are we condensing? no more than 25 mL for any one experiment. 3) Over what period of time? about 60-90 mins each experiment. 4) What temperature would we want the fluid to be? Usually be room temperature, but certain experiments may require us putting ice in the bath to cool it a bit.
PART 4 – OTHER INITIATIVES
36
GENERAL OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
In a general water conservation outreach strategy a variety of events took place over the year addressing water related issues.
37
HISTORY
This work builds off a legacy of water-related initiatives Loyola has significant aquatic ecology research
initiatives In 2012, Loyola banned the sale of single-use,
plastic water bottles to address water access and social justice concerns
Many of Loyola’s sustainability initiatives are driven by social and environmental justice concerns and NOT finances alone
38
PART 5 – RESULTS
39
RETROFITS
In total, more than 790 equipment retrofits took place.*
Anticipated savings during the life of this equipment is expected to be greater than 30 million gallons. At 2015 water rates, this will save Loyola over
$200,000 over the life of the fixtures This is equal to a 11.8 month return on investment**
*Includes retrofits for Labs **Only includes equipment costs, all installations were done in-house
40
BEHAVIOR CHANGE – MATERIAL VALUES, GOALS, AND WATER USE (MELCHIORI, MALLETT, DURNBAUGH, & PHAM, 2016)
Material values predict consumption behavior Conservation goals must outweigh personal
comfort goals in order for people to change their behavior
Material Values
Comfort Goal Conserve
Goal
Water Use
.35 (.08)*
-.11 (.09)
.54 (.14)*
-.66 (.14)*
Indirect though Comfort Goal: .19 (.07); 95% CIs: .08 / .35†
Indirect though Conserve Goal: .07 (.06); 95% CIs: -.04 / .21
Presenter
Presentation Notes
From Time 1 data, 269 participants, average age 19.48 years, mostly White (70%) Material values: the desire to gain happiness from and structure one’s life around purchasable products. [The items were “I’d be happier if I could afford to buy more things,” “My life would be better if I owned things I don’t have,” “I usually buy only the things I need” (reverse-scored), “I like to own things that impress people,” “I try to keep my life simple, as far as possessions are concerned” (reverse-scored), and “The things I own say a lot about how well I’m doing in life.”] But we wanted to see how motivation to pursue personal comfort vs. conservation impacted this relationship. Personal comfort goal: “I prioritize my personal comfort over everything else” Conservation goal: “It is personally important to me to conserve natural resources” Material values were linked to the comfort goal, but not the conserve goal; both goals predicted water use, but the only significant indirect path was through the comfort goal. In other words, the comfort goal accounted for or explained the relationship between material values and water use, but the conservation goal did not. We take this to mean that conservation goals must outweigh personal comfort goals in order for people to change their behavior. Specifically, we propose that campus water conservation campaigns may have more success by simultaneously activating the goal to conserve while dissuading material values, like providing reminders that emphasize the value of experience over consumption.
BEHAVIOR CHANGE – WATER-SAVER IDENTITY (MALLETT & MELCHIORI, UNDER REVIEW)
• Measured self-reported and actual water use in 4 groups • Residents in the campaign reported using less water
(M = 27.21, SD = 1.01) than those who did not receive the campaign (M = 31.88, SD = 1.09), F(1, 300) = 9.85, p = .002.
• Primary survey responses saw students who received the campaign containing identity messages reported a stronger goal to conserve, t(269) = -2.78, p = .006 and use less water, t(269) = 3.18, p = .002 than students who did not receive these messages
• Additional feedback was gained on user’s response to behavior change messaging and retrofitted fixtures
Presenter
Presentation Notes
From Time 2 data, 303 participants, average age 20.04 years, mostly White (67%)
BEHAVIOR CHANGE – WATER-SAVER IDENTITY (MALLETT & MELCHIORI, UNDER REVIEW)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
prior 2 years fall prior 2 years spring pre-intervention fall post-interventionspring
Wat
er U
se (i
n 10
0,00
0 ga
llons
)
Water Use by Condition and Across Time
control retrofit only identity only retrofit + identity
Intervention
Presenter
Presentation Notes
From Time 2 data, 303 participants, average age 20.04 years, mostly White (67%) Orient audience to the graph: label axes, explain he different bar colors, etc. All of the conditions except the retrofit plus identity-building condition, F(1, 43) = 1.29, p = .46, used less water in the post-intervention spring semester than they did in the pre-intervention fall semester, control: F(1, 3) = 17.08, p = .056, retrofit-only: F(1, 3) = 15.74, p = .060, identity-building only: F(1, 4) = 20.76, p = .046. Finally, the post-intervention spring semester showed significantly less water use compared to the prior two springs for the identity-building only (p = .011) and retrofit only conditions (p = .014).
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
From the residence hall water conservation retrofit, we learned the following: It takes time and coordination to install retrofits Retrofit installations are best done when students are not living in the residence hall It’s useful to engage with student teams and have them use the university as a
learning laboratory. Student groups conducted insightful water audits From the student behavior change campaign, we learned the following: Identify and promote behaviors that are do-able and supported by “personal
comfort” motivation To create a memorable and well communicated poster, incorporate humor, campus
celebrities, social norms, and images of vivid consumption to make messages memorable
Perceived behavior change does not necessarily translate to water conservation From the lab retrofit campaign, we learned the following: Staff members and academic units are not incentivized to seek out and use water
efficient fixtures. This needs to change if water conservation is to be a shared goal for the university as a whole
44
PART 6 – ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND RESOURCES
45
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Funded by the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, a division of the Prairie Research Institute at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Loyola University Chicago
Many thanks to supporting partners Loyola Psychology Department – Professor Robyn Mallet and Dr. Kala
Melchiori Loyola Facilities Department – Kana Wibbenmeyer, Bill Sherry, Mike
Jurewitch, Mark Feiereisel, Hamlet Gonzalez Loyola Residence Life - Tyrone Newsome, Jamie Ellis, and Devon
Cowherd The majority of the work of this project was designed, conducted and
led by Hanh Pham and implemented by Sustainability Interns including Taylor Choy, Christie Kochis, Jared Brocklehurst, Meghan Pazik, Lauren Standal, Kelly Hof and many other students that conducted audits, completed surveys and brought insight and passion to water conservation.
46
OUTREACH RESOURCES
Further information on this project is available at http://www.luc.edu/sustainability/campus/focus_area
s/water/istcwaterefficiencyproject/ Including edit-able posters, water trivia and other
materials Prize / Quiz Wheel is available from multiple
vendors such as: http://www.spinningdesigns.com/weeklyspecials.html Comes with template to customize categories or prizes
47
INFORMATION RESOURCES
WaterSense - http://www3.epa.gov/watersense/ Includes savings calculators, available rebates, product guides and other
information Alliance for Water Efficiency - http://www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org/
Includes active College Water Efficiency Group with case studies and audit tools Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education -
http://www.aashe.org/ Contains various case-studies and presentations on water efficiency at
campuses across North America City of Chicago Department of Water Management -
http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/water/supp_info/conservation.html
Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning - http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/livability/water 48
CONTACT
Aaron Noble Durnbaugh Director of Sustainability Loyola University Chicago [email protected]
THANKS
49
