|
Authors:
Kristine L. Bradof, staff, GEM Center for Science and Environmental
Outreach; Maria K. Stoneberg, student, Dept. of Forest Resources
and Environmental Science
Overview and Current Status
at
Michigan Tech
Michigan Tech spent nearly $5 million in FY 01-02 on total utility
costs (steam, electricity, water/sewer), which translates to about
$833 per student per year. Campus Energy Manager Dave Taivalkoski
has identified potential savings of 12.8%, or $107 per student
($619,000 total), simply from minimizing wasted resources, such
as lights and computers left on when not in use. This waste minimization
requires no initial financial investment, only awareness and cooperation
throughout the campus community.
Facilities Management
maintains detailed power and heating cost avoidance records for
the MTU campus, which document savings of $10.3 million over 22
years through energy conservation. MTU’s overall annual
utility costs in FY 99-00 totaled $1.47 per gross square foot
(GSF) of building space, which compares favorably with Carnegie-Mellon
University. However, the amount of power and heat conserved has
decreased in recent years, at a time when utility costs are rising
significantly. Taivalkoski’s “lights left on”
survey of campus buildings in early fall 2001 found 5,207 lights
left on in unoccupied areas at an estimated cost of $22,098 per
30-week academic year. After Taivalkoski hired a student to shut
off lights each night in seven buildings and asked employees,
through a series of articles in Tech Topics, to shut off lights
and other electrical devices when not in use, the lights left
on dropped to 2,515 by late January, representing a 30-week projected
savings of $11,527, or 52% of the wasted energy identified in
the survey. An ESC energy waste reduction experiment documented
a 20% reduction in Dillman Hall electricity use over the past
year, saving $12,600 in that building alone (see details in appendix).
Benchmark
Universities
Michigan Tech’s benchmark universities vary considerably
in their emphasis on energy efficiency and other “green”
measures, but some can serve as successful models for Michigan
Tech. For example, Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) has
demonstrated savings equivalent to an annual average of $207 per
student for electricity over the past 8 years and $19 per student
for water over 5 years. At the University of Michigan, energy
conservation since 1973 has saved $78 million in energy costs
while reducing energy use more than 20%. The campus has grown
by 68%, but energy consumption has risen only 34%. UM established
an Energy Conservation Measures Fund in 1988 to support energy
efficiency projects, with part of the savings returned to the
fund. By 1995, total savings exceeded total investment.
Lighting is a large
category of energy use. Just three fluorescent lights left on
continuously for a year costs Carnegie-Mellon $175, but turning
lights off when leaving for the day reduces that cost to $46/yr.
UM recommends energy efficient "task lighting" such
as desk lamps to provide light only where needed.
UM estimates that turning off ventilation and reducing heating
by 10oF for 8 hours per day, when buildings are mostly unoccupied,
would reduce energy costs by more than 10%, saving $35,000 in
a typical 100,000 square foot building. At RPI an Energy Awareness
Program launched in 1992 avoided more than 13 million kWh of electricity
use in its first 8 years and saved $13,450,000, despite the addition
of several thousand computers and peripherals. RPI has an EPA
Energy Star Awareness program for utilizing power management features
on all office equipment and purchasing Energy Star compliant equipment.
Furthermore, their Water Conservation Initiative has saved $756,912
while conserving nearly 180 million gallons of water since 1995.
Computer operation
accounts for about 12 percent of all UM electricity use. EPA estimates
that most PCs are not being used most of the time they are running,
and 30-40% are left running continuously. After 16 minutes, the
energy needed to run the computer outweighs the start-up energy.
The life of a monitor is related to the amount of time it is on,
not the number of start and stop cycles. Screen savers are unnecessary
energy wasters. The best screen saver is simply turning off the
monitor! Computers and other office and laboratory equipment can
be shut off nights and weekends when not in use. The energy to
run a 300-watt computer/monitor/printer system operating 24/7
costs about $200 annually, but the cost falls to $50 when run
40 hrs/wk. UM recommends buying Energy Star equipment, which uses
about 30% less energy when running and an additional 50% less
energy in “sleep” mode. Carnegie-Mellon's web site
notes that turning 500 CRT monitors off after work and on weekends,
even if computers are left running for network backups, will save
nearly $16,000 annually. Studies by the Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory show that shutting off a modern computer up to three
times daily instead of running it continuously does not reduce—and
may even prolong—the useful life of the hard drive and other
components, contrary to a lingering perception based on experience
with earlier computer technology.
University of Missouri—Rolla
began developing an Environmental Management System in 1997 and
became the first university in the U.S. to receive ISO 14001 certification
for a campus-wide EMS in June 2001. The 8-member EMS Advisory
Committee includes a full-time EMS coordinator.
Committees and environmental
coordinators are often vital for implementing energy conservation
strategies. At Carnegie-Mellon, an Environmental Practices Task
Force submitted a draft Environmental Practices Policy to the
Administration in 1997, after which a Green Practices Committee
(faculty, staff, students) was established in 1998 to develop
a more comprehensive waste reduction and energy conservation program.
Carnegie-Mellon hired a full-time staff environmental coordinator
in 2000, in addition to a staff energy manager. At Rennselaer
Polytechnic University, the Greening of Rensselaer Initiative
employs both a Greening Coordinator and an Energy & Water
Conservation Coordinator (full-time student co-op positions).
The University Committee for a Sustainable Campus (UCSC) at Michigan
State University has a director of the Office of Campus Sustainability,
who is leading a new course in fall 2002, "Topics in Sustainability:
Walking the Talk at the University We Call Home." This course
will begin to conduct a campus environmental assessment. UCSC
and Physical Plant staff have already prepared a report, "Development
of an Energy Assessment Methodology for University Academic Buildings:
Case Study of the Natural Resources Building, Michigan State University."
MSU also sponsored "Energy: It's Not All You Save. A one-day
conference devoted to presenting current energy conservation options
to everyone interested in Saving Money while Preserving Our Environment."
Carnegie-Mellon is
sending a strong environmental message with its Wind Energy Initiative,
which includes constructing a wind turbine and committing to wind
power for five percent of the university’s total electricity
needs. Even though wind power costs about 2 cents more per kWh,
C-M has made the commitment to
1. demonstrate the
university’s recognition of the importance of developing
renewable, less environmentally damaging sources of energy,
2. provide educational
opportunities for students, faculty, and staff, and
3. help support
wind power generation in western Pennsylvania. Carnegie-Mellon’s
is the largest single retail purchaser of wind energy, equivalent
to the energy required to run 650 homes for a year. The Green
Practices Committee plans a “university challenge”
for conservation efforts to cover the extra cost of the wind power,
while reducing overall energy consumption.
Recommendations
1.
Minimize energy costs through reduced use, mainly by elimination
of waste
The ESC is willing to work with appropriate channels to encourage
the reduction of the school’s environmental footprint. Realistic
short-term goals include, but are not limited to the following:
• Encourage
individual responsibility for shutting off lights and equipment
in unoccupied areas
• Use power management features; manually shut off monitors
for computers that must
stay on
• Install motion sensors in classrooms, laboratories,
and restrooms where lights are often left on
• Develop incentives for reporting problems and suggesting
or making improvements
• Become an EPA Energy Star partner
• Create internships and co-ops to support beneficial
programs
2.
Develop an Educational Campaign
The ESC can develop an upbeat campus educational campaign on a
theme such as "Going Green to Save Green" to emphasize
how individuals practicing conservation can save the University
money, with the savings funding energy efficiency equipment and
programs. This campaign will have many benefits, such as increasing
environmental education on campus and enhancing MTU’s environmental
credibility.
3.
Adopt
an official University energy policy
The ESC encourages the University to adopt an official energy
policy to encourage more efficient practices among students, faculty,
and staff. Leadership from the administration sends a far stronger
message to the University community than any ESC recommendations.
Good examples of environmental policies endorsed by upper-level
administration can be found at the State University of New York
at Buffalo's web site, wings.buffalo.edu/ubgreen/content/policies.html.
|
If
you have any questions on the recycling program at MTU: