Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Environmental Sustainability Task Force Final Report December 1, 2006.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Environmental Sustainability Task Force Final Report December 1, 2006."— Presentation transcript:

1 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Environmental Sustainability Task Force Final Report December 1, 2006

2 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Executive Summary page 3 Guiding Principlespage 4 LEED® certificationpage 5 Best Practicespage 6 Green Technologiespage 8 Investment/Cost Analysespage 9 MACDADI Preference Toolpage 10 Task Force Memberspage 15 Appendicespage 16 Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 2 December 1, 2006 Final Report – Table of Contents

3 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Executive Summary Mission The GSB will take a leadership role in environmental sustainability in developing the Knight Management Center. Vision The new Knight Management Center should clearly exemplify the GSB’s leadership position on business and the environment and motivate other organizations and institutions to emulate this point of view. As a campus of buildings the Knight Management Center will be: a generator of clean energy highly responsible in the use of water an exceptional environment for people The Knight Management Center will demonstrate that smart building design can dramatically reduce environmental impacts while only slightly increasing or even reducing lifetime cost. The campus will inspire the GSB community and, in turn, development of new environmentally sustainable products or services, environmental leadership among our alumni in varied fields, and personal commitment to the environment. Strategy The Environmental Sustainability Task Force recommends that the GSB seek Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) certification for the Knight Management Center. The Task Force membership unanimously agrees that LEED® certification should be sought for all buildings, with a strong consensus to seek LEED® Platinum. The certification level will be finally determined after cost estimates are better defined and funds to cover certification costs are raised. * See Appendix A for the complete executive summary narrative Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 3 December 1, 2006

4 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. New Campus Guiding Principles The Task Force developed Guiding Principles—the most important goals for the project— that the Knight Management Center must balance throughout design and construction: 1)Promote academic excellence through a campus that inspires its inhabitants, supports a healthy and productive teaching and learning environment, and is flexible and adaptable to changing pedagogies and technologies that will emerge in the coming years. 2)Sustain the environment and our GSB community by promoting interaction between and among GSB and Stanford students, faculty, alumni, and the global business community while reducing the environmental impact of campus construction and operations and actively participating in the sustainability movement. 3)Be economically responsible by using current and future financial resources wisely and anticipating economic costs and benefits beyond initial construction costs. Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 4 December 1, 2006

5 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. LEED® certification recommendation Anticipated incremental green building and certification costs: +2%+5%+7% Construction cost ($150mm) $3.0mm$7.5mm$10.5mm LEED® registration$20k LEED® documentation$450k LEED® project mgmt$100k Commissioning ( %) $750k$1.9mm$3.0mm Total$4.3mm$10.0mm$14.1mm The Task Force strongly recommends that the GSB seek LEED® Platinum certification for all the buildings that will comprise the Knight Management Center. * See Appendix B for a sample of a LEED® rating sheet * See Appendix C for detail on LEED® certification costs, LEED® certification recommendation, and Justification for recommending LEED® certification Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 5 December 1, 2006

6 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Best Practices Stanford Environment & Energy Building Goals: Energy and water reduction; use of life cycle cost analysis Total cost of sustainable features = $6.2M (8% of total cost of construction) Total cost premium of energy features = $2.04M (2.8% of total cost of construction) Total building system performance: annual energy savings goal of 50%; projected savings of 48% First Cost Premium:$2,038,754 Annual Savings:$237,000 Payback:8.6 years Green Dorm Goals: zero carbon; no potable water use Research based design: Heat recovery from waste shower water, Fuel cell capability, Water treatment Other Universities UC-Merced 7 LEED-registered projects on campus—all seeking LEED® Silver—2 expected to be certified in Jan ‘07 Costs averaged 2-5% above baseline for each building Working with USGBC on new program where multiple buildings in a campus environment can be certified more easily and at lower cost than if registered individually Yale University Energy Task Force – Convened in Fall 2004, a university-wide committee made recommendations on Yale’s approach to energy: Committed to investing in energy conservation and alternate energy sources that will lead--based on current projections--to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 10% below 1990 levels by the year (Similar commitment by the Connecticut State Legislature and the New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers Climate Action Plan.) Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 6 December 1, 2006

7 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Best Practices (cont.) Industry Nike European Headquarters – highlights: Facility converts to residential use if necessary Window frames constructed from recyclable aluminum All wood in construction and external is from certified managed forests Sewage piping contains a large amount of Polyethylene instead of PVC LucasFilm, Presidio, San Francisco – similarities to Stanford: Air: operable windows, underfloor air Materials: Recycled or reused steel, piping and crushed concrete from the demolished Letterman Hospital and its 13-acre asphalt parking lot (more than 80% of building materials were recycled) Materials: sourced locally Parking/Landscape: 1500 underground parking spots; existing trees reused and/or relocated Experts in the Field Jeff Koseff – Director, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University o A lack of water will be Stanford’s biggest problem in 20 years o Using photovoltaics (PVs) makes an incredible statement; PV market is changing rapidly and a third party could manage the system o May reduce number of PVs we might like but add infrastructure now to add more later Daniel C. Esty – Director, Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, Yale University o Societal expectation that the best way to attack environmental problems is not via gov’t channels but in the corporate sector and other non-governmental avenues o Use a green project as a teaching opportunity Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 7 December 1, 2006

8 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Green Technologies to consider SiteBuilding orientation On-site stormwater management/treatment Drought-tolerant landscaping StructureRecycled content materials High-volume flyash in concrete Operable windows Cool or green roof Prefabricated elements Raised floor Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood Spectrally-selective glazing SystemsGeothermal Photovoltaic (PV) and Building-Integrated PV Panels (BIPV) Solar hot water Grey water Flexibility for future retrofit Water conserving fixtures Living System® Radiant heat SettingOperable windows, with link to HVAC controls Energy efficient lighting Modularity SceneryRecyclable furniture with recycled content Organic foods Low-VOC materials Reclaimed/FSC certified wood * See Appendix D for a short description of each technology listed above Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 8 December 1, 2006

9 Investment/Cost Analyses The Task Force looked at several options for how to perform economic analyses on project costs to consider more than the first costs associated with the project. Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) is the Task Force’s preferred economic method of project evaluation that takes into account all costs arising from owning, operating, maintaining, and ultimately disposing of a building or a building systems over a given period, usually related to the life of the project. LCCA takes into account the time value of money by discounting all cash flows to a common base date to make them time-equivalent before adding and comparing them. It also includes inflation and energy price projections over the length of the building lifetime horizon. The Stanford Sustainability Guidelines currently recommend using a LCCA and provide the following guideline for evaluating decisions: 5 years or less to recover costs: required investment 6 – 10 years to recover costs:strongly recommended investment More than 10 years to recover costs: discretionary investment *Standard Payback methodology generally focuses on how quickly initial investment can be recovered but typically ignores all costs and savings occurring after the point at which payback is reached. The Payback method is not a measure of long-term economic performance or profitability. Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 9 December 1, 2006

10 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. MACDADI Preference Tool MACDADI = Multi-Attribute Collective Decision Analysis of Design Initiatives Developed by John Chachere and John Haymaker at Stanford’s School of Engineering, the MACDADI method enables a project team to more systematically, transparently, and precisely define and prioritize project goals and then assess tradeoffs among design options that impact those goals. By helping teams manage and communicate their goals, options, analyses, and decisions, MACDADI aims to improve consensus building and project performance. The slides that follow illustrate the MACDADI process in action on the GSB project: Goal Tree – enumerates and categorizes the goals for the GSB project Survey – polls stakeholders to weight the importance of each goal Survey Results – summarizes Task Force members’ relative preferences for each goal Stanford Green Dorm Process – exemplifies how the data already developed at the GSB can be used in our next phases to evaluate design options with respect to the goals. *See Appendix E for a print-out of the GSB survey Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 10 December 1, 2006

11 Goals MACDADI: Goal tree GSB Goal Tree Task Force members defined and categorized project goals

12 Preferences MACDADI: Survey GSB Survey Task Force members prioritized goals

13 MACDADI: Survey results Top Preferences for GSB Task Force – Energy use and flexibility are top priorities

14 Options MACDADI: Green Dorm process as example GSB Next Steps 1.GSB to enlarge stakeholder groups 2.GSB to refine goals and preferences 3.Designers propose options 4.Designers perform analyses 5.GSB assesses value Images are Value of alternative for different stakeholders

15 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Task Force Members GSB Faculty Bill Barnett Mary Barth Erica Plambeck Ken Singleton Stanford Civil & Environmental Engineering Faculty John Haymaker Students Sam Goldman, MBA ’07 Sarah Chandler, MBA ’07 Alumni Jo Conover, MBA ’79 Maria Eitel, SEP ’01 Shelley Ratay, MBA ’05 Brian Trelstad, MBA ’99 Heidi B. Welch, MBA ’90 GSB Staff Kathleen Kavanaugh – convening chair Terry Godfrey Brigid McCormack Karen Wilson Stanford Staff Laura Goldstein *Special thanks to Kevin Burke of William McDonough + Partners for his input and participation Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 15 December 1, 2006

16 Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Appendices A.Executive Summary B.LEED® checklist/rating sheet C.LEED® certification costs matrix, LEED® certification recommendation, and Justification for recommending LEED® certification D. Green technologies – full description E. MACDADI survey – GSB Environmental Sustainability Task Force – final report - 16 December 1, 2006


Download ppt "Click to add title Click “View” > “Header and Footer” to edit name and date above. Environmental Sustainability Task Force Final Report December 1, 2006."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google