1. P08424 Residential Energy Savings Robert Underhill: Project Manager Aaron Resetarits: Component Analysis/ Implementation Feasibility Bill Jamieson: Building System Analysis/ Component Analysis Swathi Paruchuri: Statistical Analysis/ Human Behavior Kris Laera: Statistical Analysis/ Engineering Economics Jeremy Barczak: Coding/ Data Acquisition Sponsor – Facilities Management Services

2. Project Summary Customer Needs Specifications Audit Verification Test Plan Results and Conclusions Hallway Timers Test Plan Results and Conclusions Plans for Future Improvement Incandescent Conversion Test Plan Results and Conclusions Plans for Future Improvement Energy Competition Test Plan Results and Conclusions Plans for Future Improvement Closing Discussion Agenda

3. Project Description Reduce energy consumption on Residential side of The RIT campus Market - Students living in the dorms Key High level Customer Needs Save RIT money Reduce Energy consumption Increase student awareness Characterize and explain student energy usage Engineering Specs Payback < 3 years >$24,000/yr 5% Reduction with modifiable suggestions 10% reduction with competition Involve 3380 students in competition to reduce their energy Breakdown (%)of the typical student’s energy based on 3.3 kWh total

4. Design Specifications

5. System Architecture Overview Reduce Energy Energy Audit Grass Root Campaign WebsiteCompetition Hallway Lighting Incandescent Conversion

6. Audit Verification Testing The results of the floor measurements will be broken down into a per student average and compared with the estimated per student energy usage. Both numbers will be compared on per day basis. Energy Usage Per Student Audit Results2.21 kWh/student/day Testing Results2.31 kWh/student/day Percent Difference4.50%

7. Hallway Timers Test Plan Install 1 timer (Intermatic T101) on Gleason 3, South Set timer to allow lighting from 7am-11pm (16hrs) Record electricity usage over the span of 1 week After test week, turn off timers and record 2 weeks of baseline Average together the 2 weeks of baseline Compare average baseline week to the test week

8. Goals Reduce lighting by 4 hours per day Weekly reduction of 14.3kWh A 14.3kWh reduction equates to a 2.74% reduction in overall floor electricity usage –meets ideal specification of 2% reduction This savings equates to $0.95/week = $33.13/year With an overall cost of $81.08 to install this one timer we would see a payback period of 2.45 years –meets marginal specification of 3 year payback

9. Results Cumulative Test Electricity Usage = 51.52kWh Average Baseline Electricity Usage = 60.19kWh Electricity Saved = 8.67kWh This electricity reduction indicates that we reduced lighting time 2.74 hrs/day A 8.67kWh reduction equates to a 1.66% reduction in overall floor electricity usage –meets marginal specification of 1% reduction This savings equates to $0.57/week = $20.09/ year With an overall cost of $81.08 to install this one timer we would see a payback period of 4.03 years –Does not meet marginal specification of 3 year payback

10. Reasons for Results Scheduling delays forced us to run the test before collecting baseline data 1 week was not long enough to test 1 half floor was not a good representative sample for all floors on campus Times that we scheduled to have timers shut off were times that the lights were typically off anyway

11. Future Improvements Will want to test again: –Test in one entire building or multiple floors on multiple buildings –Test for longer than 1 week –Have timers turn off lights during the day; most students have class between 10am and 4pm (can use day lighting during this time) Intermatic T101 will incur some maintenance costs due to eventual power outages: –Use Intermatic ET100C with battery backup ($72.30 from www.grainger.com)www.grainger.com –Payback period becomes 5.14 years (misses marginal payback period, but becomes all profit after this period)

12. Incandescent Conversion Background Plan called for changing to all fluorescent bulbs on the Residential side of campus Test – compare predicted campus wide savings to real life one half floor savings Based on audit each student had on average –1.38 incandescent bulbs, 3 hours per day, –60-watts per bulb

13. Test Plan 1.Install Current Transformers to establish baseline 2.Hand out bulbs to students 3.Monitor test period 4.Calculate percent difference from baseline to test period 5.Compare to expected percent decrease For test run, two $50 gift cards to the bookstore were raffled off in order to gain cooperation Should see the same savings in % on a half-floor as on the whole campus (based on similar number of bulbs per person)

14. Adjustment of Figures Based on audit results (1.38 bulbs/student): –Expected target see reduction in kWh of 5.9% (1.5% decrease in expenditures) Hallway statistics resulted in only.78 bulbs/student (25 bulbs, 32 students) –New target computed resulted in a kWh reduction goal of 3.3% (.83%) –Still less than a year payback

15. Goals and Results Goal 3.3% Saved 3.813%! Met marginal specification value of 3% In the case of a policy change, conversion from incandescent to fluorescent bulbs is economically viable

16. Plan to Improve Implement a policy change –Currently no microwaves or torch lamps allowed in room –Additionally, only allow fluorescent bulbs Periodic checks done by RA’s to insure students are abiding policy change –Already in place

17. Competition Test Plan 1.Establish website 2.Record energy consumption baseline 1.2 week period (March 31 st – April 13 th ) 2.Determine average weekly consumption 3.Post competition flyers 4.Send out emails to students in Residence Halls 5.Record competition consumption 1.2 week period (April 14 th – April 27 th ) 2.Determine Average Weekly Consumption 3.Compare to Baseline and expected decrease 6.Determine winning group 7.Pizza Party *Competition Pushed Back one week due to metering issues

18. Competition Goals Reduce Energy Consumption---------------------------~10% of weekly use Save RIT on Energy Expenses-------------------------$2000 during Competition Short Payback Period-------------------------------------Pay for Party within 3 weeks Increase Student Awareness----------------------------10% resident student website hits

19. Competition Results Reduce Energy Consumption----------------------------~0.5% of weekly use Save RIT on Energy Expenses--------------------------$170.50 during Competition Short Payback Period--------------------------------------Unknown Increase Student Awareness-----------------------------1179 website hits (38.4%)

20. Results Breakdown Week 1: Group 1: Decrease 1.70%Group 2: Decrease 1.74% Group 3: Increase 2.73%Group 4: Increase 1.52% Total: Group 1: Decrease 0.50%Group 2: Decrease 1.18% Group 3: Increase 1.50%Group 4: Decrease 1.53%

21. Reasons for Results Lack of Interest Many potential distractions from competition Website Errors Loss of output during competition Some functionality issues Timing End of spring quarter Increase in ‘necessary’ computer/ lighting use Lack of Ownership Large groups cause inability to realize personal contribution Largest group is currently approximately 1500 students

22. Plan to Improve Increase RA involvement Constant contact with Student Body Increase Competitive Spirit Improve Website Functionality/ Appearance Make website more user friendly Additional group member (SE/CS/IT) Internet Browser Compatibility More robust implementation Data acquisition Abstraction/polymorphism Ensure meter output Improve Timing Early in quarter/ school year Surround with ‘environmental’/ energy related activities Increase Number of Meters One meter per building

23. Website Test Plan Hand out surveys for 20 students Survey includes three tasks to be performed by the student Time each student for each task individually Ask to rate the website on a scale of 1-5

24. Results Time to access information: 20 seconds –Average time (from testing): 19.4 seconds Website is aesthetically pleasing: 3 –Average rating : 3.1 (from testing) –Meeting the specification Functionality of website: 4 –Average rating: 4.0 –Meeting the specification 75% of the surveyed students found it easy to get to the page and would visit the website again

25. Results ctd. 80 % of the students were able to understand and interpret the data Comments: –“A picture of the dorms would make the website more visually stimulating” –“Things need to be moved around a bit” –“This is an amazing project and I hope RIT takes some interest”

26. Technical Website Testing Unit Level –Individual files, functions and processes Integration –Interaction between user interface and background execution System Integration –System interaction with external sources

27. Final Specifications Review