Demonstrating Sustainable Energy Technologies

Michael J. KelleherExecutive Director Energy and Sustainability

SUNY College Of Environmental Science and Forestry

February 2013

President’s Climate Commitment 2006: be Carbon Neutral by 2015

We are encourages by our students to be green

1. Energy Conservation Measures - energy saving renovations, technologies, & facilities upgrades.

2. Alternative Energy Projects - onsite clean & renewable energy projects to power existing structures.

3. Green-Building Energy Systems - design of new construction with integrated renewable energy systems. Ultra efficient building envelopes allow surplus energy to flow to other buildings.

4. Campus Action Campaigns - efforts by ESF community for increased awareness, voluntary behavioral adjustments, policy changes, reduced waste, etc.

5.  Forest Carbon Sequestration - designation & management of select ESF forest properties for carbon sequestration & storage purposes.

A LEED Platinum building (targeted) with a power plan in the basement, engage all who come to our campus is a discussion of energy & sustainability.

Projected building energy Consumption 40 Kbtu/ft2-yr

56% less than ASHRAE 90.1

Systems design begins with a high performance building envelope. A bioclimatic façade controls thermal loss and solar gain to minimize building design loads.

49.5 billion BTU 95 billion BTU

49.5 billion BTU

45 billion BTU

52%

48% of energy input is wasted

as losses

Overall Before the Gateway Energy System

49.5 billion BTU 65 billion BTU

49.5 billion BTU

15.9 billion BTU

76%

Wasted energy hasbeen cut in half

Overall With the Gateway Energy SystemDelivered Energy Required

Conversion Efficiency

Energy Input Losses

DeliveredEnergy

Delivered Energy Required

Conversion Efficiency

Energy Input Losses

DeliveredEnergy

Inputs are now 55%renewable

Decision to install multi-component energy system

• Fuel diversity (biomass, solar and natural gas)– Risk management (prices and physical supply)– Renewable fuels (biomass and solar)

• Technology diversity– Risk management (technology failure)– Match electric and thermal needs– Demonstration (positive externality)

• Economic Analysis– $3.2 million cost ($963,000 NYSERDA funding)– Projected annual savings of $400,000 annually– Providing a $1.5 million NPV over 15 years

• Environmental Impacts– Reduce CO2 emissions by 2700 tons annually– Reduce local and overall SO2 and NOx emissions– Added an electrostatic precipitator to lower fine particulate emissions

below current standards.

Biomass CHP, Efficient and low emissions

• ESF/NYSERDA leadership in Environmental Stewardship– This project is in an urban setting close to the

Carrier Dome, Hospitals and college campuses.• Included an electrostatic precipitator

• Emissions are reduced compared to existing purchased electricity and steam

– ESF will be working with NYSERDA to measure emissions under varying load conditions before and after the electrostatic precipitator.

• New York has an abundant supply of biomass– Sustainably manage the forest resources and use efficiently– Promote Environmental Stewardship and Responsibility

Sustainable Project Challenges

• Money– Capital vs. operating $$$– Many incentives are tax benefits, need to be

creative to use those.

• Finding/making believers– Technology risk (or perceptions)– Fine tuning solutions.

• Incorporating projects and curriculum