1. DATA-BASED COMMISSIONING BUILDING-WIDE FUME HOOD FACE VELOCITY REDUCTION MIT Laboratory Energy Efficiency Case Studies

2. The Energy Challenge and Opportunity: Data-Based Commissioning Observed creep in energy consumption in existing buildings Failed/overridden equipment/controls often observed Maintenance budgets squeezed and efficiency can be a lower priority Data-based commissioning technically appealing as a way to focus maintenance effort

3. Action Taken: Data-Based Building Commissioning Remote monitoring of building performance Interface with building control system Compare actual performance to model Specific maintenance issues identified to owner’s staff monthly Energy saving dollar value of fixes calculated Fixes observable in subsequent months

4. The Results Expected to find complex lab buildings drifting out of spec. They were, but also… Significant energy waste in certain buildings Defects in design or construction discovered even though buildings had been commissioned MIT is very pleased with our results Utilizing on our most energy intensive lab buildings

5. The Results

6. Implications for Wider Adoption Approach well suited for multiple sectors Can be applied in new and existing buildings Highly cost-effective Several third party firms available Identified fixes can be done in-house or contracted

7. FUME HOOD FACE VELOCITY REDUCTION Case Study The Dreyfus Building (18) Department of Chemistry

8. The Energy Challenge and Opportunity: HVAC is largest source of energy use in lab buildings Chemical fume hoods are energy intensive, prevalent on campus, and their use growing Design criteria for high air volume rates can exceed safety needs Reducing air face velocity proportionally decreases energy use Can optimize both safety and energy efficiency

9. Action Taken: Reduce Fume Hood Face Velocity Building-Wide Worked collaboratively with EHS experts to determine appropriate optimization of safety and efficiency Collaborated with leading faculty and researchers Tested range of face velocity rates Consensus rate of 80 feet per minute rate identified Recalibrated 130 hoods in Building 18 to 80 fpm from 100  Building control software modified  Air control valves reset  Air diffusers adjusted and relocated  Certified all hoods to ASHRE 110 standard

10. The Results Fume Hood Face Velocity Reduction  Cost: $306,00  Estimated Annual Savings: $162,000  Simple Payback: 2 years  Performance monitored via Cimetrics system  Reduced rate now used in new facilities

11. Implications for Wider Adoption Face velocity requirements may vary by organization Common rules-of-thumb are being challenged Adoption should grow with awareness and outreach Must work collaboratively with users to find best solution