The final presentation for my senior design project at Clemson University. I gained real-world experience by working with a team of four other mechanical engineering seniors for fifteen weeks to design a cost-effective, energy reduction strategy for Clemson University Facilities. The solution, which is currently being implemented on campus, is a computer power-management system with a projected annual electricity savings of about $80,000 and a greenhouse gas emissions reduction of approximately 1,000 MtCO2e/yr that requires almost zero capital investment or maintenance costs.

1. Final Recommendations Presentation 12/3/2009

2. Introduction/Executive Summary SCIES and Clemson Facilities contracted with ME 402 to select and research initiatives to reduce Clemson’s energy usage Aramark concessions presented a report of its findings in an energy audit of Clemson University (July 2009) Combustion and Energy Systems, Ltd. and Calmac, Inc. generated proposals for Clemson Facilities to reduce energy usage through major equipment upgrades This report and these proposals were reviewed to select an appropriate energy-saving project in line with Clemson’s energy reduction goals Once a project was selected, it was researched and developed in order for it to integrate with Clemson’s existing infrastructure and practices The project we selected, a green computing initiative, if implemented, will save the University approximately $48,000 to $80,000 in electricity costs per year

3. Problem Statement and Constraints Original Problem Statement Our project is to select an economically-viable solution to reduce energy costs on Clemson's campus Project Goal Improve the probability that the selected initiative will be implemented optimally Project Constraints Any solution implemented must... reduce energy consumption reduce greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide) eventually pay for itself be able to be implemented by December 31st, 2010 have a capital cost of less than $1.2 million be implemented during off-peak hours meet all building code requirements and not harm nor endanger the environment, the building occupants, university assets nor the community.

4. Criteria and Weighting Project Criteria Any solution implemented should: have a minimal payback period (target: less than 2.5 years) [10] maximize the return on investment (over the lifespan of the solution) [9] maximize the ratio of greenhouse gas emission reductions to capital spent on the project [4] not require new maintenance costs [4] contribute towards fulfillment of LEED criteria or other green building certification [3]

5. ConDex Condensing Economizer ConDex system is a condensing economizer that would be added to one of the existing natural gas boilers at Clemson’s Central Energy Facility The system cools flue gas to below its dew point to reclaim sensible and latent heat by condensing flue gas water vapor (return water pre-heat) Bid from Combustion and Energy Systems identifies the following with regard to the ConDex system: Estimated Capital Investment: $192,320 Pay Back Period: 1.6 years MTeCO2 Reduced: 1239 Annual Energy Savings: $123,100 in fossil fuel costs

6. Hunter Hall Energy Improvements Hunter Hall improvements identified in Aramark report include: Install heat recovery for rooftop AHU’s (report #64 and #65) Replace heat recovery coils on AHU-1 & 2 (report #66) Address chilled water pumping issues (report #68) Aramark identifies the following information regarding these projects: Estimated Capital Investment: $285,000 Pay Back Period: 3.6 years MTeCO2 Reduced: 970 Annual Energy Savings: $14,000 in fossil fuel costs $65,000 in electricity costs Picture Courtesy: Clemson University

7. Daniel Hall Energy Improvements Daniel Hall improvements identified in Armark report include: Optimizing dual duct system (report #53 and #54) Schedule various mechanical equipment (report #55) Optimizing chilled water pumping controls (report #57) Repairing and calibrating dampers for AHU-1 (report #57) Scheduling exhaust fan (report #57) Installing damper actuators for AHU-2 (report #58) Aramark identifies the following information regarding these projects: Estimated Capital Investment: $197,000 Pay Back Period: 4 years MTeCO2 Reduced: 608 Annual Energy Savings: $10,000 in fossil fuel costs $39,500 in electricity costs Picture Courtesy: Clemson University

8. Building Management System (BMS) A BMS would improve occupant comfort while reducing energy consumption by incorporating enthalpy control sensors, motion sensors, CO2 sensors, wireless thermostats and HVAC timers to control lights, pumps, fans, vents, and heat exchangers automatically or by predetermined schedules BMS can be networked and controlled by a central computer from far away or with a smartphonewhile walking through the building Aramark report identified Daniel Hall as suitable for a BMS, however the group leaned towards using the Fluor-Daniel Engineering Innovation Building (EIB) as it is more modern and a much greater consumer of energy Modern systems would integrate more easily with new controls EIB is less likely to be renovated in next 10-15 years

9. Building Management System (BMS) Aramark identified the following regarding the incorporation of a Building Management System in Daniel Hall: Estimated Capital Investment: $30,000 Pay Back Period: 2.7 years MTeCO2 REDUCED: 135 Estimated Annual Savings: $11,000 (combined electricity and fossil fuel costs) *Values taken from BMS suggestions for Daniel Hall as provided by Aramark

10. Computer Lab Power Management Computer lab power management would force idle lab computers into a standby or shutdown state to save energy. Aramark projects the following: Estimated Capital Investment: $10,000 Pay Back Period: 0.2 Years MTeCO2 REDUCED: 620 Estimated Annual Savings: $50,000 in electricity costs *Note: Based on an estimated 8,000 desktop computers on the campus, assuming 25% currently operate 24/7 but are turned off during summer & winter breaks.

11. Decision Matrix and Project Selection Green computing imitative clearly fulfills our criteria best and scored very highly (primarily due to low capital requirements and shortpayback period) Other two highest scoring projects (ConDex and BMS) were handed off to SCIES Groups A and C for research and design

12. Research Microsoft white paper on savings possible through implementing power management used for initial background Microsoft’s estimates on savings essentially agree with Aramark’s assessment Group learned from CCIT that Clemson has over 10,500 computers on campus that it directly administers Not all systems on campus are eligible for power management; Clemson’s Condor HPC grid uses idle cycles to solve large computational problems in parallel Condor software currently implemented at Clemson does not support power management, however new versions (7.3.0 and 7.4.0) do Microsoft System Center Service Manager is a piece of network administration software slated to be adopted by CCIT that will allow group policy implementation System Center would be an excellent method of rolling out changes to desktop computers with minimal intervention

13. Experimental Testing First test run to confirm that Aramark’s savings estimate was reasonable and to check performance of Clemson systems against Microsoft benchmarks First test run to explore savings through full shutdown of idle systems Sleep mode testing was an afterthought Sleep mode figures did not agree with Microsoft’s benchmarks so a second test was run with more tightly controlled parameters (taking consumption reading after 3 minutes in sleep mode) Systems reached more of a steady-state and data agreed with Microsoft’s

14. Final Recommendations All non-Condor connected systems should have sleep mode enable as soon as possible. All non-Condor connected systems should be set to sleep automatically after 15 minutes (or 3 hours for podium/lectern computers). As soon as possible, CCIT’s HPC group should adopt Condor server and client version 7.3.0 which enables power management features and a low-power mode for the grid. Screen savers should be disabled on LCD monitors connected to all non-essential systems (Windows, Mac, UNIX/Linux) and replaced with monitor sleep mode (hardware feature and setting).

15. Final Recommendations (cont’d) CCIT and Technical Support Providers should promote log-out and shutdown awareness by sending quarterly email reminders to turn computers off at the end of the day. Images for student- and University-owned laptops and computers acquired and managed by CCIT should be updated to reflect above recommendations and should include a new wallpaper designed by CCIT to remind users to log-out when not at their terminal and shutdown their computers. Clemson University should promote green computing through its Solid Green program and actively remind students, faculty, and staff of the cost savings associated with turning off and unplugging electronic devices that are not in use.

16. Project Implementation Implementation will be carried out primarily through two concurrently-running efforts First step will be to put settings on new CCIT images (early Spring 2010) This will roll out the changes to a large portion of systems very soon No additional effort required, reimages are regularly scheduled New images will impact newly acquired systems as well Microsoft System Center will be rolled-out across all systems in the coming months Will provide CCIT the flexibility to roll out group policies, like power management CCIT hesitant to use registry edit for now when System Center is coming soon System Center roll-out will likely coincide mostly with Windows 7 CCIT roadmap projects Windows 7 roll-out to begin in Fall 2010

17. Solid Green Initiative Group has learned that Solid Green plans a promotional campaign for on-campus students in the fall Group will provide savings data in final report and any information that Solid Green requests to help improve their campaign Similar data will be provided to CCIT Training for incorporation in a slide for new hire training A fact sheet for Solid Green and CCIT Training was created and can be found in Appendix G of the final report

18. Savings Potential Project’s savings potential rests almost exclusively on how many systems take advantage of new power management regime CCIT estimates that between 3000 and 5000 systems is a very reasonable estimate, correlating to a total predicted annual savings of $48,000 to $80,000 in electricity costs Such a reduction represents 5-8% of the reductions necessary for Clemson to meet its ambitious 2020 energy savings goals

19. FMEA/Project Concerns Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (Appendix B of final report) was created to analyze potential issues with adopting new power management policies New policies could potentially affect security, stability, and user experience if not implemented carefully Sleep mode affects these issues the least of the options surveyed CCIT should be attune to allowing users to opt-out of settings in special circumstances (lab computers running simulations, remote access, etc.) Wake-on-LAN investigated as part of project, however this feature presents serious security concerns due to complex nature of Clemson network.

20. Future Recommendations Better power management of the Condor grid would provide serious savings Over 900 computers on campus are left on 24/7 in support of Condor grid Upgrading to latest Condor client software would allow HPC group to implement new power management features that allow for grid to detect when it is appropriate to enter a low power state Updating the University’s acquisitions policies to requiring the purchase of products certified under the latest ENERGY STAR guidelines would be advisable Power consumption of devices should be a primary concern when considering future purchases

21. Feedback/Questions