Oberlin College's Adam Joseph Lewis Center

Early

BY JOHN E. PETERSEN,Adopter PH.D.

Courtesy of DOE/NREL; Photo by Robb Williamson When planning began for Oberlin College’s Adam Joseph Lewis Center in 1992, ENERGY STAR and LEED certification plaques didn’t hang in building lobbies. Few new construction projects incorporated ecological design — the notion that human systems should mimic and integrate with natural ecosystems.

s one of the early proj- sun’s energy in photovoltaic panels sustainable design. A variety of ects of the modern green and using natural processes to break popular and academic articles and movement, the Lewis down and recycle wastewater. books have reflected on the build- Center, completed in During its 10 years of operation, ing, assessing energy performance A2000, demonstrated that energy- thousands of building profession- and its role in the emerging green efficient design could cut energy use als, educators and students have movement.1–6 Perhaps the most significantly. The building draws toured the facility, gaining a new significant legacy of the Lewis on nature’s resources, capturing the perspective on the possibilities of Center is the way it has inspired the

20 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011 This article was published in High Performing Buildings, Winter 2011. Copyright 2011 ASHRAE. Posted at www.hpbmagazine.org. This article may not be copied and/or distributed electronically or in paper form without permission of ASHRAE. For more information about High Performing Buildings, visit www.hpbmagazine.org. ADAM JOSEPH LEWIS CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

application of ecological design prin- arrays, energy consumption by each BUILDING AT A GLANCE ciples to projects ranging in focus of the major end-uses within the and scope from green technology to building, weather conditions, soil Name Adam Joseph Lewis Center for local foods to urban revitalization. temperature and moisture, on-site Environmental Studies The Lewis Center is an integrated rainwater storage, biological activity Location Oberlin, Ohio (approx. 37 building-landscape system that and water flows within the on-site miles southwest of Cleveland) provides offices and teaching spaces wetland-wastewater treatment sys- Owner Oberlin College for Oberlin College’s Environmental tem (the “Living Machine®”) and a Principal Use Classrooms, offices Studies program. David Orr, the host of other variables. A Building Employees/Occupants 9 faculty and Paul Sears distinguished professor Dashboard® in the lobby presents staff, 150 students when classrooms of environmental studies and poli- real-time data in a format designed are at full capacity tics, initiated the design process in to engage a nontechnical audience. Conditioned Square Footage 13,600 (13,950 with addition of conference 1992 by offering students the oppor- room in 2009) tunity to consider how a new or Energy Capture and Use Includes: Offices 1,100 ft2 renovated facility could best serve The Lewis Center incorporates Classrooms and conference 3,900 ft2 the growing needs of the program. energy-efficient features now com- Public (atrium, foyer, kitchen, restroom) Ensuing design charettes engaged mon in green buildings includ- 3,000 ft2 MEP 1,000 ft2 green building and environmental ing passive solar design, natural Storage 200 ft2 technology professionals in a conver- lighting, high-efficiency electrical Living Machine 700 ft2 sation that considered how “state-of- lighting, natural ventilation, energy Distinctions/Awards the-shelf” technology might be com- recovery ventilation (ERV), an The Chicago Athenaeum American bined with state-of-the-art design enhanced thermal envelope, inte- Architecture Award, 1999 AIA Committee on Architecture for to generate a laboratory for the grated thermal mass, an earth berm Education Honor Award, 1999 emerging field of ecological design to the north side of the building and Green Building Challenge Award, 2000 Build America Award, 2001 at Oberlin and beyond. (See Table 1, a ground source heat pump system. AIA/COTE Top Ten Green Projects, 2002 Page 22, for initial project goals.) The ground source system circu- One of U.S. DOE 30 milestone build- lates liquid into eight 250 ft deep ings for 20th century Most important green building con- Assessing Performance wells and through a series of heat structed in the last 30 years, To capture high resolution data pumps within the building. Two Architect magazine poll, 2010 for research, ongoing commission- large heat pumps temper fresh air Total Cost $7.14 million, which includes: ing and education, approximately on the east and west sides of the Building construction costs (includ- 150 environmental sensors were building and a pair of water-to- ing 59 kW rooftop solar array at $386,000 and Living Machine that installed throughout the building water heat pumps provide radiant internally treats and recycles water and landscape to monitor all aspects floor heating for the atrium space at $400,000) $5.4 million of building function. The sen- and baseboard heat for the Living Fees and expenses $1.7 million sors were installed between 2001 Machine. Offices and classrooms and 2004 in partnership with the are heated with a total of 16 indi- Total Cost Per Square Foot $535 National Renewable Energy Lab. vidual heat pump units. Site Work $158,000 These sensors continue to moni- Occupants control heating and Substantial Completion/Occupancy tor energy production by solar cooling in the offices. Classrooms January 2000 are heated, cooled, ventilated and Opposite The Lewis Center houses Oberlin lit by a building automation system College’s Environmental Studies program. Early program goals called for a building that combines scheduled occupancy To accommodate growth of the that would harvest and convert sunlight with motion sensors, CO sensors Environmental Studies program into indoor heat, food, light, biodiversity and 2 electricity while emphasizing responsible and light sensors. All offices and and additional faculty members, an use and cycling of materials. classrooms have operable windows. existing conference room was split

Winter 2011 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS 21 into two new office spaces in 2009. A 450 ft2 conference room (and new ground source heat pump unit) was added over the north entrance. Low windows on the atrium’s south side and high windows on the north create convective cooling during the warmer months, which results in minimal use of air conditioning. The roof of the Lewis Center is elongated on an east-west axis to maximize available solar area. The 59 kW rooftop photovoltaic (PV) array, installed in the fall of 2000, covers 4,800 ft2 and uses mono- crystalline silicon technology. This curved roof system has an average angle of 15º south. The rooftop system cost $386,000 (approximately

TABLE 1 LEWIS CENTER INITIAL PROGRAM GOALS

Use the sun for light and passive heat Strive for a building that exports electricity Use energy and materials efficiently Use sustainably harvested and manu- factured wood and other materials Jennifer Manna for Oberlin College Above The large atrium space was immedi- Eliminate use of toxins in paints, fab- ately popular for catered dining events and rics and other materials musical performances, but the somewhat Choose classroom and office furniture cavernous feel and acoustical qualities constructed of recycled materials were less inviting for more intimate social interaction. The Environmental Studies Purify wastewater on site and Studio Art Programs co-sponsored a week-long seminar at the Lewis Center in Promote biological diversity 2002 that brought together environmental Design the building and landscape as artists to consider ways in which art might an educational laboratory foster environmental stewardship within the built environment. One of the ideas Monitor building performance, use data that emerged from this gathering was a to educate and improve performance solar-powered water sculpture for the Lewis Design the building to evolve or “learn” Center’s atrium. Right The sound of falling water, which per- Serve as a model of ecological design meates the atrium and hallways, modulates that can be used at larger scales and according to the cloud cover since the pump by whole organizations is powered by a solar tracking panel.

Note: Based on description of design goals found in David Orr’s Design on the Edge: The Making of a High-Performance Building. John E. Petersen

22 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011 Got Red?

Check out our new Filtrete™ Commercial HVAC Filters... Showing at AHR Expo 2011 in Las Vegas

3M Puriﬁ cation Inc. 400 Research Parkway, Meriden, CT 06450, U.S.A. (800) 648-3550, (651) 789-7381 www.ﬁ ltrete.com/commercialbuilding HPB.hotims.com/33326-1 1 3M and Filtrete are trademarks of 3M Company. © 2010 3M Company. All rights reserved.

D61182asjl_1012709.indd 1 11/17/10 12:24:56 PM $6.60/watt), which included design (RECs) so that all of the power pro- fees, modules and installation costs. duction (whether used directly in The 8,800 ft2 parking lot solar pavil- the building or exported) is a true ion, installed in June of 2006, uses offset for on-site consumption. polycrystalline technology. The 101 Ten years of PV data show sea- kW pavilion consists of a steel under- sonal patterns and discrete changes story with structural supports that in patterns of production and con- holds the entire array facing south sumption of electricity (Figure 1). at an angle of 5°. The parking lot Given Oberlin’s temperate location, system, including infrastructure and it is not surprising that strong sea- design fees, cost nearly $1,000,000, sonal patterns are visible in elec- or approximately $10/watt. tricity production and use. The rooftop and parking pavilion Early design corrections resulted arrays are connected to the grid in improvements in the performance John E. Petersen To increase the sustainability of the site, through a city transformer; when of the HVAC system.5 The monthly the building plan called for a fruit orchard total PV production exceeds build- heating loads in the Lewis Center on the sloping earth berm north of the building. Students helped plant the trees ing consumption, electricity is sold correlate with outdoor temperatures; in the winter of 2000. The 2010 harvest back to the city through a net meter- much of the interannual variability included 25 bushels of six varieties of organically grown apple, pear and persim- ing agreement. Oberlin College in electricity used for heating evident mon (most of which were eaten directly retains the renewable energy credits in Figure 1 is related to weather.6 off the trees).

KEY SUSTAINABLE FEATURES

Water Conservation Living Machine treats and internally recycles 90% of water used inside building Low-flow toilets Rainwater cistern supports restored wetland ecosystem Recycled Materials Incorporated throughout building and furnishings Daylighting 100% daylighting during normal working hours except in auditorium Individual Controls Office occupants can control dimmable lighting, operable windows and indi-

vidual ground source heat pump units Oberlin College A team of student operators maintain and Other Sustainable Features monitor the ecological performance of the Extensive monitoring system gathers Living Machine, which treats and recycles the data via more than 150 sensors building’s wastewater. Operating the system, installed throughout building at which involves collecting and analyzing water one-minute intervals; real-time envi- quality samples, managing plant pests and ronmental performance data is dis- keeping an eye on system components, is played in the lobby and on the Web one of the most popular jobs on campus. Orchard and organic kitchen garden Many research projects and course lessons produce substantial volume of food taught at Oberlin College have focused on gaining insight into the biogeochemical processes taking place in this system. John E. Petersen

24 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011 Left The Living Machine treats wastewater using a system based on natural processes that includes microbes, plants, snails and insects, and is designed to treat up to 2,000 gallons of the building’s wastewater daily in a garden-like atmosphere. The treated wastewater is recycled back through the building for nonpotable use. The Living Machine has proven to be a highlight of the building tour and especially excites and intrigues schoolchildren.

Between 2001 and 2006, the rooftop array met approximately half of the Lewis Center’s electricity demands. The addition of the parking lot solar pavilion boosted photovoltaic production slightly above energy consumption, resulting net export to the city of Oberlin (Table 2, Page 28). Most buildings in the northern United States rely on fossil fuels as a heat source and experience peak

Courtesy Robb Williamson of DOE/NREL; Photo by electricity demand during the summer air-conditioning season. In con- FIGURE 1 ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION trast, buildings such as the Lewis 2001 – 2010 Center, which heat and cool with ground source heat pump systems, often exhibit peaks in electricity demand during the winter. Because the Lewis Center relies heavily on natural convective cooling during the summer, peaks in production and consumption of

ENERGY AT A GLANCE

Annual Energy Use Intensity (Site) 32.94 kBtu/ft2 (all electric building) Renewable Energy (Produced) 33.47 kBtu/ft2 Annual Net Energy Use Intensity – 0.52 kBtu/ft2 Heating Degree Days 6,500 (NOAA 1961–1990) Cooling Degree Days Electricity production is depicted by source, and electricity consumption is stacked by end use. 500 (NOAA 1961–1990) An arrow marks the addition of the 101 kW photovoltaic parking lot pavilion in June 2006. The apparent rise in plug loads in late 2009 reflects the incorporation of a new heat pump on a plug load circuit added to serve a new conference room. A slight trend of increased annual energy use is consistent with growth in faculty and programming at the Lewis Center.

Winter 2011 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS 25 John E. Petersen Designers sought to connect building users and visitors to the pre-agricultural history of the site by restoring forest and wetland ecosystems. Images of the wetlands from 2001 and 2007 illustrate the rapidly developing natural landscape around the Lewis Center. electricity occur at opposite times of (and at night) and a net exporter electricity) occur in the summer the year (Figure 2). Although elec- during the summer season (and dur- months and coincide with peak tricity production and consumption ing sunny periods of the day). export from the Lewis Center. are nearly balanced on an annual In northeast Ohio, peak rates of Therefore, although the Center rep- basis, the facility functions as a net grid electricity consumption (as resents a small source of power, the importer during the winter season well as peak wholesale prices for seasonal patterns of photovoltaic

FIGURE 2 MEAN ELECTRICITY PERFORMANCE BY MONTH (JAN 2001 – SEP 2010)

Average gross electricity consumption for each month is depicted as a stacked bar graph of mechanical equipment associated with the Living Machine, lights, plug loads and HVAC. Average electricity production is illustrated as a stacked bar graph of the rooftop PV array and the parking lot PV array (data period for the parking lot array is June 2006–September 2010). Error bars for each month are the standard deviation of interannual variability in total site energy consumption and total photovoltaic production. The inset on the right shows annual averages in production, consumption and net use.

26 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011 HPB.hotims.com/33326-15 TABLE 2 A VERAGE ANNUAL ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION AND production complement the local CONSUMPTION, JUNE 2001 – SEPTEMBER 2010 demand curve. A previous analysis examined Electricity by End Use kW kBtu/ft2 · yr Percentage of Total the payback time of the rooftop Living machine mechanical 0.42 0.91 3% photovoltaic array in currencies 4 Lighting 1.6 3.51 11% of CO2, energy and money. This analysis assumed that the panels Plug load 3.2 7.04 21% would degrade in output at 1% HVAC 9.77 21.48 65% per year and concluded that the

Total site energy use 14.99 32.94 100% PV system would offset the CO2 released in manufacture and instal- Electricity Production lation in 3.7 years, would offset Rooftop PV 6.18 13.59 the energy used in the process in Parking lot PV (added in June 2006) 9.05 19.88 7.3 years, but would not pay back the financial investment within its Total PV 15.23 33.47 useful lifespan. Net Consumption Although both photovoltaic systems have occasionally experienced Net site energy – 0.24 – 0.52 downtime as a result of system Percentage site energy met with PV 102% faults, compared to other mechanical

Note: Reported kW values are averaged over 24 hours and 365 days of the year for all years in which building systems, the solar systems data were collected. have proven reliable, stable and

ASHRAE GreenGuide NEW! The Design, Construction, and Operation of Sustainable Buildings Third Edition

Whether you are an HVAC&R system designer, architect, building owner, building NEW in this edition: manager/operator, or contractor who is charged with designing a green building, the ASHRAE GreenGuide aims to help you answer your biggest question—“What do I do now?” ASHRAE GreenGuide ASHRAE GreenGuide Using an integrated, building systems perspective, the ASHRAE GreenGuide covers the need-to-know information on what to do, where to turn, what to suggest, and how to interact with other members of the design team in a productive way. Information is provided on The Design, Construction, and Operation each stage of the building process, from planning to operation and maintenance of a of Sustainable Buildings facility, with emphasis on teamwork and close coordination among interested parties. • Guidelines on sustainable energy master planning

This third edition of the ASHRAE GreenGuide is meant to be an easy-to-use reference Third Edition with information on almost any subject that should be considered in green-building design. The GreenTips found throughout this edition highlight techniques, processes, measures, or special systems in a concise, often bulleted, format. Also, information is • Updates on teaming strategies provided in dual units—Inch-Pound (I-P) and International System (SI)—so that the content is easily applicable worldwide. References and resources mentioned are listed at the end of each chapter for easy access. In this edition, you’ll find the followingnew information: • Information on how issues related to carbon emissions affect building • Guidelines on sustainable energy master planning • Updates on teaming strategies design and operational decisions • Information on how issues related to carbon emissions affect building design and operational decisions • Strategies for greening existing buildings • Updates on newly developed green-building rating systems and standards • Strategies for greening existing buildings • Additional information on building energy modeling and follow-up measurement and verification • Compliance strategies for key ASHRAE standards • A new chapter on water efficiency • Updates on newly developed green-building rating systems and standards • New GreenTips, including those featuring green strategies for chilled-water plant and boiler plant design • Additional information on building energy modeling and follow-up Third Edition measurement and verification • Compliance strategies for key ASHRAE standards American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and ISBN: 978-1-933742-85-4 Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1791 Tullie Circle Atlanta, GA 30329-2305 9 781933 742854 404.636.8400 (worldwide) American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. • A new chapter on water efficiency Product code: 90324 11/10 www.ashrae.org

• New GreenTips, including those with green strategies S N ASHRAE Member Price: $83 for chilled-water plant and boiler plant design A Green Guide Cover.indd 1 10/25/2010 9:07:38 AM P List Price: $98 I T

Get the free app for your phone at HPB.hotims.com/33326-30 Visit www.ashrae.org/greenguide http://gettag.mobi

Green Guide Third Ed half-page.indd 1 11/3/2010 9:05:28 AM generally low maintenance. An anal- BUILDING TEAM ysis of the performance of the rooftop array conducted in 2006 revealed no Building Owner/Representative noticeable degradation in solar per- Oberlin College/Leo Evans formance from this system compared Architect William McDonough and to its first five years of operation.6 Partners, Kevin Burke As a result of Ohio’s renewable General Contractor Mosser Construction energy portfolio standards, the value Mechanical, Electrical, Structural of Ohio-based RECs associated with Engineer Lev Zetlin Associates PV systems recently increased by a Energy Modeler Steven Winter Associates factor of 10. If the panels continue

Courtesy Robb Williamson of DOE/NREL; Photo by Civil Engineer CT Consultants to perform and the economic value The rooftop photovoltaic panels have performed of solar energy continues to rise, it better than expected, requiring little mainte- Environmental Consultant Rocky Mountain Institute and others is possible that the financial invest- nance. An analysis of the rooftop photovoltaic production showed no noticeable degradation ment as well as the environmental Landscape Architect John Lyle and of the system during its first five years of opera- Andropogon Architects investment in PV technology will tion. The rising value of Ohio-based renewable energy credits has improved the economic pay- Daylighting Loisos and Ubbelohde have a positive return. back outlook for the PV system. From an energy perspective, the Lighting Clanton & Associates project demonstrates that even in might justifiably point towards the Indoor Air Quality Consultant Hal Levin & Associates sun-challenged northeast Ohio, it large price tag of the project. On is possible to export energy in a the other hand, many of the tech- Wastewater Treatment System Designers Living Technologies commercial building. Certainly one nologies and approaches to design

HPB.hotims.com/33326-35 John E. Petersen Solar panels on the Lewis Center’s roof combined with the parking lot pavilion PV COMPARING PERFORMANCE array (added in June 2006) produce slightly more electricity on an annual basis than the building consumes. In assessing the energy performance of performance of a conventionally con- the Lewis Center, it is instructive to com- structed building of the same size, foot- pare total site electricity consumption (not print and location as the Lewis Center that including PV production) and net site elec- met ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2001. This and construction have shifted from tricity (consumption minus PV production) simulation used actual weather conditions “bleeding edge” to mainstream, and with other buildings. from March 2001 through February 2003. costs are beginning to decline. This code-compliant building consumed an Energy use in commercial buildings varies average of 53.6 kBtu/ft2 · yr.5 considerably by region, end use, design The Lewis Center’s average annual site Water Use, Treatment and management. When the Lewis Center energy consumption was 32.9 kBtu/ft2 · yr was constructed, commercial buildings in during the first 10 years (Table 2, Page 28). and Reuse the midwestern U.S. had an average site This number drops to –0.52 kBtu/ft2 · yr The Living Machine, an ecologi- energy consumption of 90 kBtu/ft2 · yr and when photovoltaic production is included. cally engineered wastewater system, educational buildings had a site intensity HVAC accounts for 65% of the building’s of 79.1 kBtu/ft2 · yr.7 Oberlin academic total electricity consumption. Although the treats and recycles water within the buildings averaged 88.5 kBtu/ft2 · yr.8 mechanical energy consumed by the Living building. The technology combines To establish a benchmark for compar- Machine amounts to only 3% of electricity ing the performance of the Lewis Center consumption, this does not include the elements of conventional wastewa- with other new construction, colleagues considerable heat energy that is sup- ter technology with the purification at the National Renewable Energy Lab plied to the Living Machine greenhouse processes of wetland ecosystems to constructed a model using DOE-2 energy during the winter months (included in the analysis software. It simulated the energy HVAC load). treat the building’s wastewater and remove organic wastes, nutrients and pathogens. Water cleaned by the Living Machine is reused in the majority of water used is for toilet and reused. City water is principally building’s toilets and landscape. flush water, which is 100% recycled. used for hand washing and drinking The Lewis Center contains neither Water cycles through the building water. Median annual rates for inter- a kitchen nor a shower facility, so the continuously as it is used, treated nal water recycling are near 90%.

30 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011 HPB.hotims.com/33326-24 Courtesy Robb Williamson of DOE/NREL; Photo by Above An overhang and north-facing windows provide diffuse natural light. The glass roof (bottom left) of the Living Machine creates a greenhouse-like environment and provides sunlight to help drive the natural processes that break down wastewater. Left A screen shot of the real-time Building Dashboard system illustrates the data that is available online at www.oberlin. edu/ajlc and at an atrium kiosk in the Lewis Center. The touch screen display allows visitors to easily interact with and explore the environmental performance of the building. Website administrators have tracked more than 70,000 hits per year to the site, with approximately one quarter of these hits originating from outside of the United States. The precursor of this Building Dashboard display was developed by Oberlin students.

It is important to recognize that the ecological value added by the on-site wastewater treatment comes at an added energy cost that includes an additional mechanical and heating load that is not present in most other buildings.

32 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011 FIGURE 3 A VERAGE JULY SOIL TEMPERATURE RELATIVE TO AIR TEMPERATURE

1.2 South Soil#1 South Soil#2 North Soil#1 North Soil#2 Overall Trend

1.1 John E. Petersen

Daily Average For Month (°C/°C) For Daily Average An earthen berm helps insulate the building’s north side and provides habitat for a fruit 1.0 orchard. Operable windows throughout the building provide free conditioning, resulting in minimal use of air conditioning.

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 BUILDING ENVELOPE The changing ratio of soil temperature at 5 in. depth to air temperature during the month of July at four locations in the landscape reflects shading provided by maturing vegetation and the Roof increase in soil surface organic matter, which acts as insulation. Curved portion (70%): Type laminated beams, standing seam aluminum R-value 27 Although the scale of the technol- the environmental performance Flat portion (30%) ogy may be more applicable to a small of the building in real time. Over R-value 20.5–40.5 community than to a single building, the course of the last 10 years, an Overall R-value 27 Reflectivity High the Living Machine has helped chal- increasingly sophisticated website lenge people’s perceptions of waste and public lobby display have pro- Walls Type Brick versus resource. The remarkably clean vided building visitors, occupants R-value smelling air within the greenhouse, and the larger community with a North earth-bermed wall R-12 the lush green tropical foliage emerg- view into the energy flows, cycles of Auditorium wall R-20 All other brick walls R-19 ing from the tanks and the periodic matter and environmental resources Glazing percentage 43% profusion of blooms create a stark and necessary to support activities in Foundation welcome contrast to the coldest and the built environment. The premise Perimeter footings R-21.6 darkest days of the Ohio winter. of this work is that real-time perfor- Slab floor in atrium R-11.5 mance data can be used to engage, First-floor classroom floors R-12 Connecting People and Place educate, motivate and empower Windows The goal of creating a building and conservation of resources and U-value 0.14 on triple pane atrium windows, 0.3 on double panes used in landscape that teach lessons about appreciation of renewable energy. classrooms and offices humans’ relationship with the envi- At least as important as computer- ronment has been realized at the based displays are the direct sen- Location Latitude 41.29 Lewis Center in several ways. sory and emotional experiences Orientation Elongated on east-west One approach has been to that people have within buildings axis; roof and atrium face due south develop a system for displaying and built landscapes, which teach

Winter 2011 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS 33 implicit lessons about human rela- occupants and visitors with the tionships with the environment. ecological and social history and Daylighting in office and class- resources of this location. The per- room spaces is an example of design maculture landscape includes a fruit choices that connect building occu- orchard, organic kitchen garden and pants with the natural environment. composting bins. The restored wet- A solar-powered water sculpture land and forest ecosystems reflect the added to the lobby after the build- preagricultural history of the site and, ing’s opening also serves as an envi- combined with a 3,000 gallon storm ronmental connection. water cistern, demonstrate respon- Building performance is often sible storm water management. John E. Petersen considered in isolation from the sur- Plantings help modulate energy The fruit orchard, kitchen garden (upper right) and 101 kW parking lot solar pavil- rounding landscape. Key goals of flows within the building and land- ion all harvest Ohio sunlight, producing the Lewis Center involve connecting scape. On the south side, slow grow- food and energy. ing native tree species such as burr oaks were planted to provide long- LESSONS LEARNED term shading. Fast growing willows were planted closer to the building Extensive monitoring and public display may allow the Environmental Studies of building data provides multiple Program to continue to grow in size with- to provide more rapid light screen- benefits. Continuous monitoring enables out increasing its ecological footprint or ing and are being selectively pruned verification and assessment of the ongo- requiring additional PV capacity. ing performance of building systems. out as the landscape matures. When problems are encountered, an Design for change. Buildings need to Temperature and moisture sensors adapt to changing institutional, social and archive of minute-resolution data provides installed on the north and south an exceptional resource for troubleshoot- ecological demands. A simple example is ing. For example, a comprehensive analy- a raised floor plenum with easily remov- sides of the facility in 2001 measure sis of the data on Lewis Center’s first-year able panels that has allowed for changes the changing ecology of the site and performance led to modifications to the in wiring and plumbing with relative ease. control technology that improved the effi- its influence on the building. As the ciency of the HVAC systems. Be certain that the small decisions trees in the landscape have matured remain consistent with the larger goals. The translation of real-time building per- and as soil organic matter has formance data into a form that is acces- A conference room that was “value engi- sible and engaging to a nontechnical audi- neered” out of the original project was stored carbon within the landscape, ence allows a building to serve not just as added over the northern entrance of the the temperature of the soil relative a place in which learning occurs, but as Lewis Center in 2009 to accommodate a teaching tool itself. The public display program growth. The cost of adding this to the air has declined, resulting in of building data in the lobby and on the component was several times the savings cooler soil that contributes to more of cutting it. Web allows multiple observers to track stable conditions for plants and changes in performance. For example, An investment in higher quality room regular Web visitors who have never physi- heat pumps and transformers used in the reduced cooling needs for the build- cally visited the Lewis Center have noticed photovoltaic system would have reaped ing (Figure 3, Page 33). and alerted the building team to anoma- financial as well as environmental savings. lies in system performance. Planning the data monitoring system Carefully consider how choices made in Conclusion individual buildings relate to institutional from the outset and integrating it with the The modern green building move- building automation systems would have choices and opportunities. Ground source reduced costs and expanded opportunities. heat pumps are an efficient way to heat ment is young, and it is not surpris- and cool buildings with electricity. However, ing that much of what we know about Practice ongoing commissioning. Short- if Oberlin College is successful in its cur- term management decisions typically rent efforts to capture waste heat from the environmental performance of focus on ameliorating acute concerns a local landfill gas electricity production this latest generation of buildings facility, the greenest source of heat for new rather than optimizing long-term environ- still comes from assessments made mental performance. A more concerted construction on the campus will not be a focus on ongoing commissioning to ground source heat pump system. during or immediately following maximize energy and water use efficiency commissioning. However, the most meaningful measures of performance

34 HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011 are those that examine how well a clear roots in lessons explored and College’s Lewis Center for Environmental building achieves its design goals embodied in the Lewis Center. Studies: Realizing the goal of a net zero • building.” Proceedings of the American Solar over an extended period of time and Energy Society. how it adapts to the changing needs References 1. Orr, D.W. 2006. Design on the Edge: The 7. Energy Information Administration. “1999 of the human and ecological commu- Making of a High-Performance Building. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption nity it is a part of. MIT Press. Survey.” http://tinyurl.com/cbecs1999. While the Lewis Center’s perfor- 2. Scofield, J.H. 2002. Early performance 8. Heede, R., J. Swisher. 2002. “Oberlin mance is a significant accomplish- of a green academic building. ASHRAE College: Climate Neutral by 2020.” Rocky Mountain Institute. ment, the most important achieve- Transactions 108(2):1,214–1,227. 3. Pless, S.D., P.A. Torcellini. 2004. “Energy ment of the Lewis Center has been Epilogue: Update to this article contin- Performance Evaluation of an Educational ues on the next page. the inspiration that it has provided Facility: The Adam Joseph Lewis Center to several generations of students for Environmental Studies, Oberlin College, To comment on this article, and design professionals. Projects Oberlin, Ohio.” NREL/TP-550-33180, go to http://tinyurl.com/952ubp3. inspired by the Lewis Center range National Renewable Energy Laboratory. To see comments and responses on 4. Murray, M., J.E. Petersen. 2004. “Payback in focus from sustainable agriculture this article, go to in currencies of energy, carbon dioxide http://tinyurl.com/9hdn4jw. to environmental policy to green and money for a 60 kW photovoltaic technology to urban revitalization. array.” Proceedings of the National Solar The city of Oberlin has been desig- Energy Conference. ABOUT THE AUTHOR 5. Pless, S.D., P.A. Torcellini, J.E. Petersen. nated as a Clinton Climate Positive John E. Petersen, Ph.D., is an associate project, an effort to redevelop the 2006. “Energy performance evaluation of a professor of environmental studies and low-energy academic building.” ASHRAE community using growth strategies biology at Oberlin College, director of the Transactions 112(1):295–311. college’s Environmental Studies program that reduce on-site net CO2 emis- 6. Petersen, J.E. 2007. “Production and and chairman of the board of Lucid sions to below zero. This project has consumption of electricity in Oberlin Design Group. Epilogue

03 Oct 2012 | John E. Petersen (author)

I write to provide additional clarification regarding graphs and numbers in this paper. Figure 2 in the paper depicts averages of all production and consumption data that were available at the time that the article was written and Table 2 provides an overall estimate of photovoltaic production and consumption. As is clearly indicated in both the table and figure, the averages considered for the parking lot array are for June 2006 (when it was first operational) through 2010.

The averages used for production of the roof top array and for building consumption are from 2001–2010. The time series of electricity production and consumption in Figure 1 provides a clear visualization of patterns of production and consumption before and after the second array was added. As stated in prior comments, an instrument error resulted in an overestimate of total photovoltaic production and hence also an error in net consumption - the production line in figure 1 should be shifted down very slightly. For clarity and completeness, below I include values of total building consumption (including all exterior and parking lot lights), corrected values of total solar production (rooftop array only through May of 2006, then rooftop combined with parking lot array) and then annual percentage met through solar production. Numbers are rounded to 500 kWh. The format is: YEAR, CONSumption (annual kWh), PRODuction (annual kWh), PERCent of total consumption met with the photovoltaic system:

YEAR CONS PROD PERC 2001 127,000 59,500 47% 2002 111,500 56,000 50% 2003 123,500 56,000 45% 2004 134,500 49,500 37% 2005 127,000 53,500 42% 2006 134,500 106,000 79% 2007 153,000 150,500 98% 2008 137,000 132,000 96% 2009 134,500 113,500 84% 2010 152,000 143,500 94% 2011 167,000 123,500 74%

A retrocommissioning process initiated late in 2011 by our new Facilities Manager, Sean Hayes, has focused on both the mechanical system and the photovoltaic systems. We are pleased to report that his work has substantially reduced the building's electrical consumption and has increased production. Beginning with the 12-month period from April 2011 – March 2012, the AJLC has produced more electricity than it has consumed. The margin has grown in each subsequent month. In the period spanning September 2011 – August 2012, 131% of the AJLC's electricity consumption was produced via on-site solar. Although the future is always uncertain, we anticipate that for 2012 and beyond the building is likely to meet its goal of exporting electricity on an annual basis.

36A HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS Winter 2011