THE CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL

SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING:

An Opportunity for Change on the UW Campus

ERS 285 Final Project Draft

Submitted by:

Steven Ahlberg

Catherine Fitzgerald

Andrea Fraser

Kyle Leetham

________________________________________________________________________________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I BACKGROUND

I.1 The CESE

I.2 Project Purpose

II SYSTEM STUDY

II.1 Figure 1

II.2 Figure 2

III DATA COLLECTION

III.1 Criteria for Energy Efficiency

III.1.1 CMHC

III.1.2 Property Manager's Manual

III.1.3 C-2000

III.2 Primary Research

III.2.1 Kitchener City Hall

III.2.2 The Optometry Building

III.3 Secondary Research

III.3.1 Windows

III.3.2 Lighting

III.3.3 HVAC Systems

III.3.4 Computer Systems

IV DATA ANALYSIS

V LIMITATIONS

VI RECOMMENDATIONS

VII CONCLUSION

VIII APPENDICES

VIII.1 Glossary

VIII.2 Key Contacts

VIII.3 References

I BACKGROUND

I.1 The CESE:

The new Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering (CESE) is a $31.5 million project that will create an estimated 375 jobs. The construction is estimated to begin in 1995 or 96 and will take from 18 to 24 months to complete. The building will consist of labs and classrooms for the teaching and research of environmental issues.

A CESE planning committee made up of representatives of staff and faculty has been created. This committee played a key role in developing the criteria for the building design and has selected five final architect teams. The teams made preliminary design models that have been on display at the Dana Porter Library since March 31st. We are now at the critical point of the process as the University President, Dr. James Downey (with help from the President's Advisory Committee on Design), will soon select the architect team that will design the future CESE .

I.2 Project Purpose:

The goal of our ERS 285 project is to collect data on energy consumption in order to make a proposal to the planning committee regarding the new Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering. Since it is an environmental building, our group feels it necessary to research and take advantage of any energy efficient options that will not only save money, but will take UW further down the road to sustainability.

As a responsible institution of the 1990's, the University of Waterloo should be fully aware of the alternatives to conventional building design standards. Aside from the ASHRAE/ IES 90.1, the BEPAC criteria to be passed in 1995 as well as the C-2000 Advanced Commercial Buildings Program should be recognized and incorporated into the planning and design of the CESE . With government funding limited to initial construction, it would be to the University's advantage to minimize operating costs in terms of monetary and environmental criteria. In this way we feel that sustainability will be promoted.

Campus community awareness and participation in energy-conservation programs will affect our ecological footprint in terms of resource consumption. As students of the University of Waterloo, it is we who define the goals, ambitions and future of the school. It is also the students who consequently benefit from the education received here. For this reason, it is essential that the students are involved in the process of planning and designing the Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering (CESE) . Student input is a key element to the sustainability of the UW campus. All future undertakings should be planned with not only the environment in mind, but with the environment as a priority.

The new building could prove to be a model of energy efficiency not only on campus but to the rest of the city. The Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering may one day provide education and inspiration for students who will continue to design and create in the future. We hope to encourage the administration to step back and re-evaluate the design process before it is too late. We believe that the University of Waterloo should take on a more integrated and cooperative approach to planning and recognize this excellent opportunity to incorporate energy efficient technology.

II SYSTEM STUDY

The system we are analyzing is marked by the boundaries of the future Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering. Although the system does not yet physically exist, it is in the planning process. Therefore, our intention is to have our recommendations incorporated into the system's planning process. The CESE is intended to house research groups, individuals and undergraduate programs in the Environmental Science and Engineering fields. The goal of the CESE is to integrate various groups and faculty in order to efficiently focus on environmental concerns.

Furthermore, the CESE is a complete system in itself, composed of both physical and social aspects. The physical aspects include the design and mechanics of the building. The physical components will help determine the efficiency of the building. We have focused on the energy subsystem as outlined in Figure 1. Specifically, we are concerned with future hydro and natural gas consumption totals per year per square metre of building space. The design of the CESE and the internal mechanisms which control water, heating, cooling, ventilation and other aspects will all affect the efficiency and convenience of the building.

The students, staff and faculty members are the planners and decision makers who make up the social components and act as future users and beneficiaries. The social components not only affect the decisions made about the building, but dictate the extent to which the conservation of energy and responsible use of resources are promoted. Figure 2 provides a detailed flow chart of power in relation to decision making within the campus social hierarchy.

Our project looks at the building as a system. We focus mainly on energy, resource use and application within the building itself. The design of the building envelope, position, structure and building materials have also been considered in terms of energy efficiency. The University has an efficient 'Mass Thermal Storage System' and ' Closed - Loop Recirculation System' which was recently recognized by The Chamber of Commerce of Kitchener & Waterloo with a presentation of an Environmental Achievement Award. We expect that these systems will be applied to the CESE . We are concerned with the ways in which the resources are used once they have reached the building. Therefore, we isolated the CESE as a system and evaluated the various alternatives available in order to best conserve energy and resource use as well as balance start-up and operating costs to the University.

Since the physical system does not yet exist, we have focused on the social aspects in terms of the planners and decision makers. Fortunately, we have a chance to influence the decisions made about the CESE because these people have the final say in design criteria and strategies. They are in control of the future of this building and should be informed and educated about the needs and wants of the users. The Plant Operations staff acts as an excellent lever of power as they are informed on the University's energy consumption. Our campus is fortunate to have some of the best experts in environmental technologies in Canada, if not the world, working for us. It is and honour and a welcomed challenge to work with the people in Plant Operations as well as the members of faculty and staff related to this project.

III DATA COLLECTION

III.1 Criteria for Energy Efficiency:

III.1.1 CMHC

The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation has established criteria for evaluating design applications for the "Healthy House" award. The following are the five main areas of consideration: occupant health, energy efficiency, resource efficiency, environmental responsibility and affordability. In terms of the new building on campus, this criteria is relevant and useful for our study. Aspects such as proper ventilation to eliminate indoor pollutants, reduction of peak energy demand, efficient use of building materials, efficient site planning and economic viability for construction should be addressed in the planning stages.(Healthy Housing, 1995)

III.1.2 Property Manager's Manual

The following are general factors affecting building energy use outlined in The Property Manager's Manual:

i. weather conditions at site

ii. insulation value of roof and walls

iii. number and size of windows

iv. quality and type of windows

v. air leakage around windows, doors and openings

vi. heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems and their operations

vii. activities within the building (lighting, hot water, appliances)

viii. patterns of occupancy and use

For the purpose of our study, we will specifically consider windows, lighting, heating and ventilation systems as well as multi-functional computer monitoring programs for the new CESE.

III.1.3 C-2000

CANMET's Building Group (Canada Centre for Mineral and Energy Technology) is a branch of Energy Mines and Resources Canada which is establishing a series of activities related to Canada's building industry. The Buildings Energy Technology Advancement (BETA) Plan is one of CANMET's new initiatives for the development of energy efficient and environmentally responsible technologies and practices for new building design. The C-2000 project is a key aspect to the BETA Plan specifically aimed at improving the performance of commercial buildings in Canada. Funded under the nation's Green Plan, the C-2000 program provided technical and financial assistance for the design and construction of office and multi-residential buildings based on tough, whole building performance requirements.

The C-2000 program is a small scale initiative that began in the summer of 1991. The strategy is to design and construct buildings that meet C-2000 criteria, monitor their performance over three years and inform industry of the results. Still in the pilot project stages, developers hope to accept up to 10 propsals which are in the design stages. Propsals for both the private and public sector are eligible and projects can be either new or retrofits. The program emphasizes a team approach involving developers, architects, engineers, builders, owners, operators and tenants. Development of management plans, training for building operators and long-term participation of tenants are also features of the C-2000 initiative.

The project's aim is not only to provide guidelines for design teams interested in entering the C-2000 program but also for a larger audience (like UW) who are interested in adopting some of the general and specific provisions to their own work. C-2000 standards for energy efficiency are based on the ASHRAE/IES 90.1 standards but are modified to be more stringent. Not only are operating energy uses monitored, the embodied energy costs of materials are taken into consideration.

Stages of the Development Process:

Phase 1: Expression of Interest

Phase 2: Concept Design

Phase 3: Design Development

Phase 4: Construction and Commissioning

Phase 5: Monitoring

Phase 6: Operations and Development

Throughout all stages there is an ongoing technology transfer and updated information on funding.

Performance Requirements:

1. energy efficiency of building and subsystems

2. environmental impact of building's construction and operations

3. health, comfort and productivity of occupants and tenants

4. functional performance of building systems

5. longevity of building systems

6. adaptability of building designs and systems to future requirements

7. operation and maintenance issues related to building systems

8. economic viability of building, considered on a life cycle basis.

(CANMET, 1993)

III.2 Primary Research:

To stress the importance of incorporating energy efficient design into the new CESE, we are examining existing systems in terms of size, hydro and natural gas consumption. These systems include the Kitchener City Hall and the campus Optometry building.

III.2.1 Kitchener City Hall

After six years of planning and construction, the new Kitchener City Hall (KCH) finally has its grand opening on September 18, 1993. Back in May of 1988, the City Council began a Canada wide competition to generate design ideas and create an awareness for Kitchener both nationally and internationally. A steering committee established nine goals for the new KCH that were incorporated into the Council's plan:

1. a permanent landmark for the city

2. should reflect the character of this city

3. good working space, able to be expanded

4. appropriate to the scale and character of the downtown

5. visual and pedestrian link to Victoria Park

6. inviting, open, and accessible by all

7. provide setting and facilities for an active public life

8. the highest standard of design

9. built within the approved budget.

In November of the following year, the Toronto firm of Kuwabara, Payne, McKenna Blumberg beat out 153 other design entries and was granted a $5 million dollar contract. A $42 million dollar general contract tender was awarded to Ellis-Don in August of 1990. A completion date was set for August 1993 with a total estimated budget of $65.1 million.

Sutherland-Schultz Inc. of Kitchener was the mechanical contracting group responsible for the installation of leading-edge technology to promote energy management and reduction of operating costs.

An $800, 000 dollar co-generation unit located on the tenth floor burns gas to heat water and runs a turbine to produce 250 KW of electricity. (250 KW that the building does not need to purchase from a hydro company). The co-generator therefore provides environmental as well as financial savings.

Overall, the KCH is considered a state of the art, environmentally friendly building based on two fundamental aspects: water conservation and energy efficiency. (Kitchener Come Celebrate, 1993)

Chris Ford provided our group with data on energy consumption and moetary savings for the KCH. The option of a cogeneration engine would not be feasible for the University of Waterloo which uses a closed loop recirculation system. High insulation windows, motion sensors and computer control systems are all options open for consideration. The computer system, although used to some extent, has yet to be used to it's full potential on campus. As a control and monitoring system, it is an option we will continue to research.

III.2.2 The Optometry Building

Our group collected data on the University of Waterloo's Optometry building located on the north side of Columbia Street. Our rationale for choosing this site is relatively straightforward: it is the only comparable academic system on campus that is isolated in terms of hydro and gas metering. Similarly, it is the only building that we could gather sufficient information on for the purpose of our project.

We researched a number of different channels including a) the newest building on campus (the Davis Center) and b) other isolated systems (the church colleges). Unfortunately, the data from the Davis Center is not comparable due to the differences in energy use. For example, the Davis Center houses a huge food court which is not planned for the CESE . Therefore, in comparing energy consumption, our data would be biased. In the case of the church colleges, the statistics would not be relative to the CESE because the majority of the occupant space is used for residence.

It is imperative that the building we choose to study is comparable to the new CESE in order to obtain viable results in our analysis. The Optometry building is composed of classrooms, labs, offices, general use areas as well as library study facilities. The CESE is expected to incorporate similar uses and therefore, we feel this comparison is feasible.

Due to time constraints, our group is unable to perform a complete energy audit of the Optometry building system. Therefore, we are relying on the information we are presently collecting from Plant Operations on energy and resource consumption totals.

III.3 SECONDARY RESEARCH:

III.3.1 Windows

Windows provide natural lighting, ventilation, alternative emergency exits and incorporate architectural style. We are presently in a new era of high performance windows that has opened up a whole new market of options. In terms of energy efficiency, the following should be considered: window type (fixed or operable), glazing type (number of panes), frame materials (affect insulation, strength and maintenance), warranties (differ with supplier and product) and the Canadian Energy Rating System. Low-e coated windows and gas fills are two types of high performance models presently available on the market.

There are new, futuristic lines emerging referred to as "smart windows". These include electrochromic, thermochromic and photochromic applications. The Low-e alternative is also used in switchable glazings where coatings are applied to suspended sheets of transparent polyester. While these options are proven energy efficient, there are also alternatives on the market that make false claims. For instance, it is suggested in the Consumer's Guide put out by Natural Resources Canada that people should stay away from pressure sensitive films that are applied directly to existing windows.

Specific models that meet energy standards are listed by the Canadian Construction Materials Centre (CCMC). Also, the National Building Code as well as most provincial Building Codes contain certain requirements that meet the CSA A440 standards for:

i. air tightness

ii. water tightness

iii. wind resistance

iv. condensation resistance

v. forced entry resistance

vi. ease of operation

(Consumer's Guide, 1994)

III.3.2 Lighting

In recent years there have been major advances in lighting technology, especially in the development of energy efficient light bulbs. Compact fluorescent's (CFL's) consist of an airtight glass tube, coated on the inside with powdered phosphors, filled with a mixture of mercury droplets and highly purified gas, usually argon. When CFL's are used in the right application (where they are not turned off and on frequently) they will last about eight to ten times as long as incandescants. This is beneficial for both the public and private sectors who are looking at ways to minimize waste being sent to landfill sites. Initial costs for CFL's are more as compared to traditional incandescent bulbs but they have a lower operational and maintenance costs. You would have to change an incandescent bulb approximately seven to eight times as compared to one CFL. It has been said that some fluorescent lights are annoying because they hum and flicker in cold weather. This is due to magnetic ballasts which have been recently replaced by electronic ballasts that eliminate the above mentioned problems. CFL's also reduce energy consumption, lower hydro bills and reduce pollution from fossil fueled power and generating plants. A 60 watt incandescent comparatively replaced by a 16 watt CFL (yielding the same amount of light) saves 44 watts per hour at the meter. Assuming (conservatively) that the 16 watt fluorescent has a lifetime of 10,000 hours, a CFL over that lifetime will save 440 KWH. This 440 KWH is equivalent to the energy from burning 450 pounds of coal or 39 gallons of gasoline used by a typical car. This 440 KWH savings amounts to $16.06 in savings per CFL. For the University of Waterloo this could amount to tremendous savings.

Solar power is also an option for perimeter lighting outside the building. Passive solar lighting could also be incorporated.

III.3.3 HVAC Systems

The heating and cooling system is a major factor that should be considered in the development of the new building. There are many different ways to save energy and cut costs when it comes to heating, ventilation and cooling systems (HVAC). The heat pump, although not very well known, is a more recent development. The heat pump is slowly becoming extremely popular in the construction of new commercial buildings. It actually delivers more heat output than the equivalent of the electric input it uses. Studies have shown that it is not uncommon for a heat pump to deliver 200% to 300% more heat energy than you would obtain from a conventional electric resistance heating system.

In the case of the new building, there is a central heating and cooling system already in place for the entire university. Therefore, it would be more effective to discuss how this system can be more energy efficient.

First of all, having the temperature put on a timer would be extremely effective in that it could be set according to occupancy levels. This would minimize total heating and cooling requirements. It would also take advantage of the energy stored in the building mass. Savings can be achieved by reducing equipment operating time and by decreasing the heat loss and gain through exterior walls and windows. The savings will of course depend upon the length of the unoccupied period each day and the extent of the temperature setback. There are many other methods which could be adopted such as taking advantage of outdoor conditions to regulate the indoor temperature and to ensure proper ventilation in all parts of the building. Finally, the introduction of high efficiency motors in the new building would cut electricity costs greatly and result in substantial savings. Although the cost of these motors are higher than the standard ones now in place in most buildings across the campus, they use between three and eight percent less electricity as compared to the standard motor. However, much labour is needed to install these new motors, which would result in large amounts of money being needed, money that the university does not have. In effect, the construction of this new building should be taken very seriously as well as the components which are going to be integrated, which includes the heating, ventilation and cooling systems.

III.3.4 Computer Control Systems

The University of Waterloo currently has a Landis and Gyr Computer-based management control system to monitor lighting, heating, cooling and ventilation of campus buildings. There are 10,000 monitoring points on campus but individual buildings are not monitored separately because it is seen as too expensive and unnecessary. A computer-based management control system for the CESE would offer many advantages. Specialized programs are presently available that can monitor more data, are more user friendly, and can be designed to help make the University more sustainable.

IV DATA ANALYSIS

For each of the buildings (Optometry and City Hall), we gathered information in terms of gross size, gross KWH consumption per year and the cubic metre consumption of natural gas per year. We used statistics from Ontario Hydro as base line data in order to compare the energy consumption levels between typical commercial buildings and more energy efficient ones such as the City Hall. Through analysis of this data, we have proven that energy efficient technologies directly cut down total energy use and offer monetary savings. Furthermore increasing energy efficiency will help to minimize the future ecological footprint and help the University on it's path towards sustainability.

For our study, the data collected on the Optometry building is compared to statistics from Ontario Hydro in order to evaluate the system in terms of energy efficiency. We considered use of electricity and natural gas consumption in regards to the Optometry building. These statistics will also be available for future reference as criteria for the monitoring of energy consumption by the CESE .

   Building    G.S.M.      Gross          Gross       Electrical       Natural Gas    
                        Electrical      Natural          Cons.            Cons.       
Cons. (KWH)     Gas Cons.    (KWH/m/year)     (m3/m2/year)    
(m3)                                        
Optometry       9511     1608692.0      231284.2         169.1            24.3        
Kitchener      19995     4276474.0      370786.0         213.9            18.5        
City Hall                                                                             
Average							                                                                               
Instit.                                                                               
Average Comm.                                                                         

V LIMITATIONS:

The contacts throughout campus and the Kitchener-Waterloo region are very helpful in trying to access information and explain figures. Plant Operations is especially considerate and we appreciate all the help each one of our contacts was able to supply. At this point, however, we have recognized a major problem concerning energy data collection of on campus systems. Plant Operations is not presently capable of supplying information on specific sub-systems for each building. Buildings are metered in groups making it difficult to determine the electrical and natural gas consumption of individual buildings. One illustration of this is seen through problems encountered in collecting information on the Davis Center. We originally wanted to use the Davis Centre as it is the newest building on campus. We were unable to do so because of problems in collecting data. Electrical and natural gas consumption are metered excluding the CIM building while building size information includes the CIM building. Also, walkways and the food court were not metered separately, creating complications. We then chose Optometry as it is the only comparable building on campus which is metered separately. Furthermore, the data available is often in segments and cannot be broken down. Consumption would be in yearly figures and not broken down to illustrate fluctuations within the year and peak demand. Also, information such as electrical consumption is not broken down into components such as lighting and HVAC. We are constantly sent from one contact person to another in order to obtain information. There is no central database which keeps updated information from which comparable data could easily be obtained. A database could contain information such as gross square feet, electrical, and natural gas consumption. Calculations would be easier to perform if all building information was centralized. Resource consumption problems would be easier to identify.

Time was another limitation in this project. We would have preferred being able to perform a complete energy audit on a comparable building on campus. Within the set four months, however, this energy audit would be a project in itself. One advantage was that our project coincided with the planning stages of the CESE. Although any project of this nature requires extensive research and constant communication with administration, we feel that gathering data on our own University campus should be easier. What information is available and who do we contact? These questions seem straightforward but our experience has proven otherwise. Fortunately, this problem can be turned into a challenge for the CESE planning committee. Efficient monitoring systems are part of our recommendations for the new building. Our frustrations may have a new channel for expression!

VI RECOMMENDATIONS:

The building Committee has stressed the fact that they plan to conform to the ASHRAE/IES 90.1 guidelines for building energy efficiency. However, the ASHRAE document itself states that compliance with these guidelines alone does not completely ensure that the annual energy costs will decrease in comparison to other typical buildings. In fact, other aspects will have a significant effect on the actual energy consumption including workmanship, thermal resistance, depreciation of materials, user lifestyles and building operation and maintenance. Our group is specifically interested in the last two aspects: operation and on-going maintenance of the CESE.

We recommend a holistic approach to energy efficiency that incorporates all aspects into the planning process. The CESE will be a complete system requiring ongoing maintenance to ensure that it functions efficiently as a whole,

The Property Manager's Manual put out by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in 1983 offers useful insight concerning two energy conservation programs: the "Random Approach" (RA) and the " Energy Management Approach" (EMA). The RA is a general plan to arbitrarily use various energy efficient technologies at different times during the building design stages. The benefits of this approach include minimal preparation and fast, direct implementation of energy efficient innovations by staff and contractors. However, the amount of information generated about the building is limited in terms of total energy use, costs and potential savings. Furthermore, the measures chosen for implementation may not be the most cost effective or be incorporated into the building design in the appropriate order. The benefits achieved through this approach are often at the expense of other improvements which could be made. For example, incorporating energy efficient lighting may be done at the expense of water conservation. The RA also lacks the benefits of a system to monitors results.

We recommend using the EMA because it ensures that information is readily accessible for selecting and correctly implementing the most cost-effective measures available. A monitoring system to keep track of data will include energy conservation as a part of the overall property management process. Although preparation time will increase and professional consultants will be required, optimum energy conservation

goals may be achieved.

C-2000 guidelines enable builders, owners and operators to take a holistic approach to building design and construction. C-2000 criteria have also proven to be excellent in reducing the energy costs of a building. Figure ??? clearly illustrates that buildings designed to C-2000 standards sufficiently cot down energy consumption when compared to conventional and ASHRAE 90.1 standards.

When considering windows, it is important to recognize the factors affecting solar gain, these are: placement and orientation, design of unit, type of glazing and interior/ exterior shading. Various high performance energy efficient windows including the low-e coating and argon fills are excellent choices to slow down the process of heat loss. Increased window area on the south side of the building will increase heating from the sun and cut heating costs. Eave overhang would help to shade window in the summer and fewer fixtures facing North, East and West would decrease heat loss in winter as well as heat gain in summer. By keeping the window to floor ratio at 1:10 (one metre square of window for every 10 metres square of floor area), overheating due to solar gain would be prevented. Another less technical idea is to plant deciduous trees that would shade windows in summer yet allow optimal heat levels in winter.

We have learned through this project about the difficulties in collecting data about our University. A computer management control system designed with monitoring feedback mechanisms would make problems easier to identify information easier to collect. One opportunity for the CESE is to incorporate individual metering, both of the building and specific aspects such as lighting and HVAC. If information is easy to collect, audits are easy to perform and the CESE would be constantly ready for improvements leading to increased levels of energy efficiency. Therefore, the long term costs would be reduced both to the University and our environment.

VII CONCLUSION

We are all fortunate to have been given the opportunity to be involved in the WATgreen initiative to promote sustainability on campus. Not only did we learn through our research on energy conservation, we also gained insight into the workings of administration. Furthermore, we recognize the importance of key contacts and ongoing communication and were introduced to new and useful computer skills.

Campus community awareness and participation in energy conservation programs will have a positive effect on UW's environmental impact in terms of resource consumption.

As students of the University of Waterloo, it is we who define the goals, ambitions and future of the school. We the students are a renewable resource who would appreciate continued involvement in the planning of the CESE. Many, like us, would enjoy the challenge of working with the plant operation to further research on energy conservation opportunities. Student input is a key element to the sustainability of the UW campus.

The money saved by the University of Waterloo through efficient energy use could be reinvested in future environmental research or in the new building itself. An endowment fund could also be set up, taking advantage of lower operating costs.

As stated in the jobsOntario announcement made on October 13, 1994, one of the goals of the CESE committee is to set up a museum in the new building as a way of focusing public attention on environmental issues and activities. It would be ideal if the building itself could be seen as an exhibit of a new age building which minimizes environmental damage and degradation commonly seen in today's society.

VIII APPENDICES:

VIII.1 Glossary:

Building Envelope: a system consisting of roof, floor, walls, windows, and doors that enclose the interior of the building space and separate it from the outdoor climate.

Embodied Energy: total energy needed to extract, manufacture and transport a specific resource to be used in the building construction.

Energy Cost Budget (ECB): annual ECB is based upon the annual energy cost performance of the building.

Ecological Footprint: "The ecological footprint is the land that would be required on this planet to support our current lifestyle forever." ( Wackernagel, n.d.)

VIII.2 Key Contacts:

Horst Beyerle - Plant Operations

Electrical Consumption

David Burns - Dean of Engineering

CESE Planning Committee

Dave Churchill - Director of Plant Operations

Patti Cook - Waste Management Co-ordinator

WATgreen Facilitator

Bob Elliot - Chairman of CESE Planning Committee

Tom Evans- Ontario Hydro

Building Energy efficiency

Chris Ford - Kitchener City Hall

Energy Efficiency Expert

John Greenhouse - Earth Sciences Chair

CESE Planning Committee

John Hoey - Waterloo North Hydro

Energy Service Supervisor

James Kay - ERS 285 Professor

WATgreen Facilitator

John Kokko - Enermodal Engineering

Energy Efficiency Consultant

Ed Lowlans - Environmental Construction Network

Dan Parent - Plant Operations and CESE Planning Committee

University of Waterloo Architect.

Larry Richards - CESE Planning Committee

Marc Saunders - Ontario Hydro

Institutional Energy Efficiency

Christina Smith - ERS 285 TA

Dave Sparling - BEPAC Manager

Tom Tandlyn - Engineering Interface Limited

Energy Efficiency Consultant

John Tellian - Oxford Suburban Group

Energy Efficiency Expert

Rick Zalegenas - Plant Operations

Heating and Cooling: Steam and Chilled Water

VIII.3 References

CANMET, Natural Resources Canada. Program Requirements. Buildings Group, Energy Efficiency Division, 1993.

Cheeseman, John P. Heat Pump. Reference Guide, 4th Edition. Ontario Hydro, 1991.

Consumer's Guide to Buying Energy Efficient Windows and Doors. Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 1994.

Deane, Lloyd et al. Towards Electrical Sustainability for the Environmental Studies Buildings: Feasibility Study. WATgreen working paper, 1991.

Energy Conservation in Multi-Residential Buildings: Property Manager's Manual. Renovation and Energy Conservation Unit, Minisrty of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Queen's Park, Ontario. May, 1983.

Field, Jack. Thermal Cool Storage. Reference Guide, 2nd Edition. Ontario Hydro, 1990.

Green Workplace Results Report - 1993/94. Management Board Secretariat. Toronto, Ontario.

Guidelines for the Interpretation of ASHRAE/IES 90.1. The Ontario Building Branch, Ministry of Housing. July 1, 1993.

Healthy Housing: A Guide to a Sustainable Future. CMHC, 1995.

Howe, S. Commercial Energy Management Control Systems. Reference guide, 3rd Edition. Ontario Hydro, 1991.

University of Waterloo. Investing in Jobs and Our Environment: The Environmental Science and Engineering Building, October 13, 1994.

Wackernagel, Mathis et al. How Big is Our Ecological Footprint?, Vancouver: University of British Columbia, n.d.