Phoenix Convention Center Phoenix, Arizona Integration of Master Planning, Energy Planning, and...
-
Upload
mark-dennis -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
2
Transcript of Phoenix Convention Center Phoenix, Arizona Integration of Master Planning, Energy Planning, and...
Phoenix Convention Center • Phoenix, Arizona
Integration of Master Planning, Energy Planning, and Energy Data
Track 2: Agency Energy Manager
[Session 6: Campus Approach to Energy Management]
Michael Case, Ph.D.U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center
August 12, 2015
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade2
Think Beyond the Building
MasterPlanning
EnergyPlanning
O & M Metering
?(CAMPS)
(CAMPS)
(Net Zero Planner)
Don’t make short term decisions without a long term plan
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Master Planning ProcessDevelop Vision Plan
Vision and Developable Area Map
FrameworkPlan
Summary FutureDevelopment Plan
Prepare Installation Development Plan
Area Development Plan (ADP) 1 ADP 2 ADP 3 ADP 4…
Installation Network Plans
Prepare Installation Planning Standards
Building Stds Street Stds Landscape Stds
Document Development Plans
Analysis of Requirements Project Lists
Complete Plan Summary
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
• Integrated Plan• Projects• Sequence• Schedule• Costs• Risk•DD1391
Energy Planning Process
2 Establish
Baseline & Base Case
5Produce
Integrated Plan
• Building • Geography• Utilities• Cost Data• Water• Waste• Greenhouse Gas
Supp
orts
Execute, Track, Measure
1 Establish Planning
Goals
3Optimize
EnergyEfficiency
4Optimize
Supply and Distribution System Mix
Iterate over Building
Measures
Focus for Campus Approach
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Area Development Plan
A typical Area Development Plan (ADP)Illustrative Plan
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Sustainability Component Plan - SCP• New concept introduced by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers• Assesses the sustainability of an Area Development Plan with
respect to energy, water, solid waste, and Stormwater• Example case studies using Net Zero Planner (NZP) and
Comprehensive Asset Master Planning Solution (CAMPS)• Winner of APA – FPD 2014 Best Sustainable Planning Project
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Goals, Baseline, Base Case, and Alternatives
• Goals – Metrics that guide the analysis of alternatives. Net Zero Energy, Site Energy, Source Energy, Renewables, etc.
• Baseline – A synthetic “typical” year. May be derived from several years representative of one or two years energy use.
• Base Case – A projection of future usage given “business as usual” policies. – Plan horizon (typically 25-40 years)– Planned construction– Planned demolition– Building renovation, consolidation, and mission change.
• Alternatives – Better Case – reduce energy demand on buildings using cost effective EEMS
that meet mission requirements (goals)– Best Case – reduce total energy usage further using supply and distribution
strategies (cogeneration, solar, wind, storage, etc.)– Many more alternatives may (and should) be explored.
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
CAMPS Facility Interface - New
CAMPS has been modified to add facilities to facility modeling groups and send energy consumption data (not shown) to Net Zero Planner
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
NZP Building, Supply & Distribution, Optimization
9
EnergyPlus simulations provide performance data for Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs)
Mixed Integer Linear Programming Optimization finds lowest cost mix of renewables, grid-supply, and CHP
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Displaying the Base Case in CAMPS
• Base Case assumes “business as usual”
• Community energy planning tools support better prediction of future performance
• Graphics illustrate which facilities are not meeting energy budgets
• Facilities modeled by Facility Groups
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Better Case
• “Better” case looks at most likely penetration of cost-effective EEMS
• Takes into account deep retrofits of fraction of buildings
• Buildings-only strategy does not quite achieve goals
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Best Case
• Best case represents more aggressive measures
• Adds renewables, storage, distribution, cogeneration as applicable
• Almost all buildings meet energy budget necessary to achieve installation goals
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Renewable Planning
• Planning to energy budget allows trade-offs
• Reduction of building loads greatly reduces required area for solar photovoltaic panels
* Note: Area shown is collector area calculated from PV Watts, not land area required to site the arrays.
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
How much energy is REALLY being used?Site vs. Source energy - example
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade16
Net Zero Planner Integrated Modeling Approach
Energy SimulationWater Simulation Waste Simulation-Process Water usage and simulate the baseline and the water Efficiency Measures using Best Practices for each Facility Type.-Pass domestic hot water usage numbers to the energy simulation-Pass usage data to the optimization and inputs to Integrated Simulator
-Receive DHW usage from the water simulation as input.-Do EnergyPlus simulation for each Facility Type.-Pass HVAC water usage and condensate recovery values to the water module.-Pass energy demands to optimization and energy inputs to the waste module
DHW data
HVAC water usage
Energy demands-Receive Energy demands to look at best practices waste to energy possibilities-Do waste simulation-Pass waste outputs to the NZI-Opt module.
-Process Energy, Water, and Waste inputs and determine cluster/installation scale MILP optimized configuration of generation and renewable supply equipment, etc.-Pass outputs for a single loop feedback to modules if necessary, and/or process and pass inputs to Integrated Simulation.
Single feedback loop if necessary
Loos
ely
Coup
led
MIL
P
Clos
ely
Coup
led
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
West Point USMA
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard
Pilot DOD Installations
Waterways ExperimentStation
Fort Leonard Wood
17
Fort Hunter Liggett
ESTCP
ESTCP
Upcoming: Fort Hood, JBPHH, Fort Bliss
• Schofield Barracks• Fort Hood• Presidio at Monterey• Johnson Space Center• Parks RFTA• Lakenheath AFB (future)
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Energy and Sustainability Goals
18UNCLASSIFIED - FOUO
[1]
Parameter 2040Base Case
2040Target
Comments
Energy Efficiency % Reference 40% “Forty by Forty”
Source Energy Use 360,740 MWh 216,444 MWh Based on Base Case
Site Energy Use 300,400 MWh Derived Depends on Scenario
GHG Reduction % Reference 100% Net Zero
Scope 1 & 2 Emissions 63,800 mt Net Zero
Energy Economics Gov’t Analysis Life Cycle Cost Effective
Internal Rate of Return NA 5% Calculated over plan period
Energy Security Acceptable No Change “Security and Efficiency”
Quality, reliability, resilience NA No change Thermal and electricEqual or better than baseline
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
All Army Installations in system, with weather (Some Navy, Air Force as well)
19
20
Adding Facilities is Easy
Building types
Baseline, Basecase, and
alternativesMap Viewers and
building lists
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Uses Readily Available GIS information
21
Import from GIS or draw in
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Compare “as-is” to future scenarios
22
Present Day2013
Planned2035
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Building Level Reports
23
Compare baseline and all alternatives
Most commonly used reports and
graphics for analysis of buildings
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Installation Optimization Process1. Integrate all building energy demands
2. Use energy density to identify possible clusters
3. Determine potential cluster equipment packages for installations and region
4. Generate alternative equipment configurations, including centralized and decentralized options
5. Optimize equipment size and pipe sizes• Electric, thermal, hydraulic, economic simulations
6. Calculate SIRcluster & EEMs
vs.vs. OneCentral Plant
• CHP• Biodigester• Boiler
• PVs• Solar HW• Wind
Two District Plants
Distributed Generation
vs.vs.
NortheastSouthwestPackage
Midwest
=
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Final Analysis of Alternatives (with Life Cycle Costs)
27
SI Units NZP Energy (MWh/yr)
Scenarios
Total Fossil Fuel + Biomass Fuel
Total Electricity
Total Site Energy
Total Source Energy
% Source Energy
Reduction from
Baseline Investment $
Life Cycle Cost (Disc Rate =
3%)
Simple Paybac
k Yrs Baseline 258,810 23,228 282,038 348,550 0% Basecase 259,424 31,020 290,444 375,219 -8% $477,361,000 District Steam 196,254 14,488 210,742 253,866 27% $155,220,000 $460,051,000 25 District Hot Water 188,011 16,189 204,200 250,916 28% $144,570,000 $435,313,000 21 Decentralized 45,564 78,232 123,796 308,998 11% $141,240,000 $467,827,000 27 Net Zero Fossil Fuel
2,828 /303,132 2,297 307,957 40,628 88% $193,155,480 $562,650,000
* See Note
• Decisions matrix• Alternatives vs decision criteria• Energy use (source and site• Life Cycle Cost
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade28
• Uses quantitative data from NZP models
• Qualitative data can be used (e.g. - stakeholder opinions)
• Sensitivity analysis can be conducted on importance of different metrics.
Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade29
• Campus-wide Energy Management requires processes and tools that help the planner to think beyond the individual building
• Master Planning, Energy Planning, and Energy Data come together in the Sustainability Component Plan
• Don’t make short-term decisions without a long term plan
Conclusions
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Energy and Climate Change
• 495 Buildings Modeled in Net Zero Planner• Weather files adjusted for +3˚C and +6 ˚C
scenarios w/ relative humidity constant• Heating loads decrease and cooling loads
increase.• Site energy decreases 3.5% and 4.6%
respectively, compared to today• Source energy increases 2.4% and 6.5%, due
to shift from natural gas to electricity, assuming no cogeneration
• Overall energy COST increases 2.3% and 6.2%• Caveat: analysis did not assess likelihood of
increase in temperature, just impact
32
Standard Building Models
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Simulation Results (preliminary)
Elec ($/kWh): 0.09NG ($/therm): 0.86
ScenarioSite Total
(kBtu)Site Electricity
(kBtu)Site Gas (kBtu)
Site Elec Cost ($)
Site Gas Cost ($)
Site Total Cost ($)
No Change 790,226,861 460,695,165 329,531,696 $12,151,478 $2,832,076 $14,983,554Plus 3˚ C 762,742,656 493,227,322 269,515,334 $13,009,559 $2,316,281 $15,325,840Plus 6˚ C 754,053,560 530,566,067 223,487,493 $13,994,421 $1,920,706 $15,915,127
Energy Exchange: Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade
Site versus Source Energy*
ScenarioSource Total
(kBtu)
Source Electricity
(kBtu)Source Gas
(kBtu)Energy
Change (%)No Change1,883,741,536 1,538,721,850 345,019,686 0.00%Plus 3˚ C 1,929,561,809 1,647,379,254 282,182,555 2.43%Plus 6˚ C 2,006,082,069 1,772,090,664 233,991,405 6.49%
Elec site/source multiplier: 3.43
NG site/source multiplier: 1.047
* Assumes electricity and natural gas purchased from grid, no co-generation