2. Leadership in Sustainability at Stanford
The Initiative on Environment and Sustainability
Research Themes
Strategic Collaborations
Interdisciplinary Training
innovation
Institutional Practice of Sustainability
Sustainable Stanford:
university-wide effort to
reduce Stanford’s
environmental impact and
preserve resources
through innovation and
best practices.
3. Stanford’s Sphere of Influence & Responsibility
Top Ten CleanTech Universities in the U.S. for 2010
“Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif. Stanford University is on the cutting edge
of clean technology. Stanford has developed an ambitious, long-range, $250
million initiative to sharply reduce the university's energy consumption and
greenhouse gas emissions. The university also has established a $100
million research institute, the Precourt Institute for Energy, to focus on
energy issues (see Stanford launches $100M energy research institute). More
than $30 million in yearly funding is now spent on energy research at the
university. Stanford Technology Ventures Program (STVP) is the
entrepreneurship center at Stanford's School of Engineering. STVP is
dedicated to accelerating high-technology entrepreneurship education and
creating scholarly research on technology-based firms that, in turn, provides
new insights for students, scholars and business leaders.
Notable cleantech spinouts: Amprius, Nanostellar, Rolith, D.light Design,
Driptech, and Veranda Solar”.
4. The Sustainable Stanford
Stanford Ecosystem
Infrastructure & Institutional &
Systems Individual Choices
5. Long Term Energy & Climate Plan
Infrastructure to Support Academic Mission
Expansion for Campus Growth
Successor for Cardinal Cogen (2015)
Reduce Environmental Footprint innovation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Declining Water Supply
Imminent Regulations
Sustainability Leadership
Economic Viability
Gas price increases & volatility
Monetization of carbon emissions
Water cost quadrupling
8. Stanford’s New Construction Standards
Require that new buildings be designed to use at least 30% less energy and
25% less water than standard buildings of the same type
Based on lifecycle cost analysis of energy demand on campus
LEED Gold Equivalent
Jasper Ridge Field Station - Carnegie Global Ecology Jerry Yang and Akiko Yamazaki
2005 Recipient of the AIA/COTE Research Center- Environment and Energy (Y2E2)
Top Green Projects Award 2007 Recipient of the AIA/COTE Building
Top Green Projects Award
9. Science and Engineering Quad
Environment and Energy Building (2008)
Science and Engineering Center (2010)
Nano Technology Center (2011)
Bio/Chem Engineering (2014)
Before: 149,000 GSF After: 545,000 GSF
10. Y2E2: Built to Conserve, Inspire & Teach
“
In keeping with its curriculum, the vision for Y2E2 is that of
an icon sustainable building that
does more than simply bring accolades to the campus.
Pushing the envelope of technology: itself designed and intended to be a teaching tool, the Y2E2 building
will inspire students to take the next steps towards
a sustainable future.”
—Vision Statement Excerpt
11. Utility Conservation Results
Energy Water
• Meets calibrated design • Met design goal to use
goal to use 42% less 90% less potable water
energy than ASHRAE than EPAct 2005
90.1-2004 • Uses recycled water for
• 40%-50% less energy flushing low-flow toilets
intense than equivalent and urinals
Stanford buildings • Lake water irrigates
(mixed use office/ native & adaptive
classroom / laboratory) landscape plantings
12. Lasting Impacts on Stanford Guidelines
Project Delivery Stanford Seismic Design Project Cost and Guidelines for
Process – Sustainability Guidelines Efficiency Lifecycle Cost
“Heartbeat” Guidelines (Feb 2003) Benchmarks Analysis (Oct
(2001) (March 2002) (Sept 2003) 2005)
Revised in Revised in 2008
2010
Board-approved,
tried, tested,
proven.
13. Understanding Performance is Key
Current Y2E2
energy
consumption
compared to
energy code
confirms the
savings modeled
during design.
15. Energy Consumption at Stanford
• 700 major buildings
• 14.2 million SF
• Annually consume about:
• 200 million kWh
• 850 million lbs steam
• 50 million ton-hrs CW
• About $60 million in energy costs
17. Approach to Energy Efficiency in Existing Bldgs
• Technology Specific
– Promote individual measures with broad application
– Leverage multiple channels to implement measures
• Building Specific
– Focus on specific project opportunities
– Develop comprehensive solutions
– Large investment opportunities
• Operational
• Behavioral
18. Technology Specific Approach
• Types of efficiency measures
– Lighting
– High efficiency motors
– LED exit signs
– Motor drives
– Window film
– Refrigerator & Freezer replacements
– Server room cooling upgrades
– Centralized chilled water conversions
– Room temperature sample storage
19. Technology Specific Approach Example
• Energy Retrofit Program
– Started in 1993
– $10 million in incentives
– 330+ projects completed
– Over 240 million kWh saved
• Over 1 year’s worth of total campus consumption
– Average project payback less than 4 years
21. Building Specific Approach
• Types of projects
– Lab ventilation control
– Direct Digital Control upgrades
– Humidification
22. Building Specific Approach Example
• Whole Building Energy Retrofit Program
– Initiate 12 Building study in 2004
– First project completed in 2006
– 11 projects complete to-date
• Invested over $15 million
• Qualified for $2.3 million in utility rebates
• Saving $3 million in energy costs per year
• Reduce campus energy consumption by 5%
– Additional $15 million budgeted for more buildings
27. The Future of Energy Conservation
• Data management and analysis
– Enable near real-time monitoring based
commissioning
• Further control precision
– Enable individual zones to be virtually autonomous
• Integrate building demand management with
supply management
– Smarter scheduling
– Automated demand reductions
29. Why Heat Recovery is Possible
We heat & cool buildings at the same time
Cooling is just the collection of unwanted heat
Stanford can recover 65% of the heat now discharged from the cooling
system to meet 80% of campus heating demands. Source: Stanford University
Draft Energy & Climate Plan (April 2009)
Summer Spring
& Fall
Heat Recovery
Winter
Heat Recovery
Heat Recovery
35. CEF Replacement Options
Options recommended fall into 2 categories:
1. Import electricity from grid, or
2. Make electricity on-campus using natural gas
2.a. Cogeneration options
2.b. ‘Stand alone’ power/thermal generation options
“To Gas or Not To Gas” is biggest question:
• Long term gas prices are prime variable controlling life cycle cost
• Other key cost variables include:
Market electricity prices and spark spread to gas prices
GHG costs and application
PG&E “Exit Fees”
38. GHG Cost
Family of Forecasts below
California Cap & Trade first year range set at $10/ton to
$40/ton
Source: Energy Strategies, Inc- Stanford Energy Plan Peer Review (Mar 2009)
39. Important Secondary Considerations
Water supply
Energy Portfolio Diversity
Flexibility to Change
Environmental Impact & Sustainability Leadership
Impact to campus during transformation
40. Campus GUP
Irrigation measures
to LW
SFPUC service began 1960
Current Allocation = 3.03 mgd
44. Changing in Phases Source: Stanford University
Draft Energy & Climate Plan (April 2009)
45. Options Studied
1. Cardinal to 2020- Extend existing Cardinal Cogen plant to 2020 then implement Option 3-
new Stanford owned and operated steam cogen plant.
2. 3P Cogen- Third Party owns and operates an on-campus gas fired cogeneration plant and
sells electricity, steam, and chilled water services to the university.
3. Cogeneration (Steam or Hot water)- Stanford constructs, owns, and operates a gas fired
cogeneration plant similar to the existing plant that does not incorporate heat recovery from
the chilled water system. The Hot Water option includes conversion of campus steam
distribution system to hot water for partial efficiency gains but does not include heat recovery.
4. Hygen (GT) - A cogeneration/heat recovery hybrid based on gas turbine technology that
intertwines the power plant with the heat recovery plant for added efficiency, but which
eliminates the modularity offered by the stand alone HR + GT option.
5. Hygen (IC) - A hybrid like #4 but using advanced gas fired reciprocating engines instead of a
gas fired turbine.
6. HR + (GT or IC)- Heat recovery plant plus conversion of steam distribution system to hot
water, with a stand-alone on-site gas fired power plant based on either gas turbine or
reciprocating engine technology to supply electricity instead of importing it from the grid.
7. HR + GSHE- Heat Recovery Option 8 with an ‘open loop’ Ground Source Heat Exchange
(GSHE) system to handle the excess winter heat and summer cooling loads that cannot be
handled by heat recovery.
8. HR + DA- Stanford converts the steam distribution system to hot water and constructs, owns,
and operates an electrically powered heat recovery plant that extracts and reuses waste heat
from the chilled water system to provide hot water and chilled water services to the
university. Electricity to power the plant and the rest of the campus is imported from the grid
under Direct Access.
9. SHP- A Separate Heat & Power plant of gas boilers and electric chillers with imported power.
46. Options Levelized at Current Commodity Prices
Best on-site Best imported
gas option power option
47. A Closer Look at the Best Options
Best on-site Best imported
gas option power option
Includes $900 million for capital, fuel,
and O&M for on-site gas fired power
plant over 35 years
$900 million is substantial…could it
pay for a renewable electricity plant
for our power instead?
48. Cost of 100% On-Site PV for Power
On-site PV solar electricity is better as long as 30% federal grants are still
available (extended through 2011)…but would require huge up-front
capital, 1,100 acres initially and grow to 1,500 acres by 2050
49. To Gas or Not To Gas?
The benefit of renewable power to the owner grows as gas and electricity
prices rise over time
Gas and electricity prices likely
to always rise faster than
general inflation over long term
50. Option Recommended: Not to Gas
…but keep option open
HR + GSHE: Heat Recovery + Ground Source Heat Exchange
Convert steam distribution system to hot water
Convert ~125 buildings on steam loop
Locate new Heat Recovery Plant on west side of campus
Design & Prepare for, but defer, ‘Plug and Play’ IC power plant
option
Clean Close Old CEF Site for Future Core Campus Development
Seek to develop better long term electricity options than 100%
gas…
But closely monitor costs and be prepared to move to gas if
prudent
51. Long Term Energy & Climate Plan
Infrastructure to Support Academic Mission
Expansion for Campus Growth
Successor for Cardinal Cogen (2015)
Reduce Environmental Footprint innovation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Declining Water Supply
Imminent Regulations
Sustainability Leadership
Economic Viability
Gas price increases & volatility
Monetization of carbon emissions
Water cost quadrupling
53. Stanford Energy and Climate Plan – Solution Wedges
5%-10% reduction in energy use though behavioral programs
with education and incentives. This could be higher with technology support.
53
53
54. Building Level Behavioral Program (launched in 2010)
Start with diagnosis, provide building report
card
Perform building audit and formulate easy and
actionable to‐do tasks with savings information
Provide leadership and coordination assistance
Provide Incentives – rewards and recognition
Tie results to Stanford’s emissions reduction
initiative
Perform payback analysis , and show sustained
savings
Train students through CEE/ES 109 and Office of
sustainability
Inform sustainability governance and guidelines
55. CEE/ES 109 Greening Building and Behavior
Service learning class to
produce student
sustainability coordinators
Work with Office of
Sustainability as staff to
assist and coordinate with
building managers with
$500/quarter stipend
Upcoming rollouts:
Sweet Hall
Haas Center for Public
Service
This is a career step/try out
for students
56. Building Level Sustainability Programs
14 buildings done
2 in progress
91 candidates
If this makes sense, how should we scale?
57. Energy Consumption Trends
Energy intensity at Stanford is now less than it was in 2000
250
200
Conservation is constantly
Energy Intensity (MMBtu/GSF)
outpaced by growth, but we
150 stay ahead….
100
50
electricity
steam
chilled water
0
total
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
60. Coming Soon at Y2E2
Y2E2
Pushing the
envelope of
technology: itself
designed and
intended to be a
teaching tool, the
Y2E2 building
will inspire
students to take
the next steps
towards
a sustainable
future.”
—Vision Statement
Excerpt
TRANS
PORTA
ENERGY Food TION
WATER WASTE
61. We Can Do Better
Real-time and high-resolution
electricity metering and
feedback to encourage action in
dormitories.
Branch circuit meters and
custom data logging software to
power a web interface to show
residents their power use and
promotes energy-conscious
living.
63. Stanford’s Sphere of Influence & Responsibility
• Sustainable Endowment Institute Top Tier: 2007, 2009, and 2010
• Sierra Magazine: 26th in 2009; 5th Place in 2010,
• U.S. Green Building Council and Princeton Review: Guide to
Green Colleges 2010
• Discovery Communications: Top 10 in 2009
