Ralph Stuart, CIH, CCHO Chemical Hygiene Officer

Cornell University

Managing lab ventilation to balance safety and sustainability !

2!

Cornell’s Path to Carbon Neutrality

Where do Cornell’s GHG emissions come from?

-

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

FY2008 FY2010 FY2012

Air Travel

Commuting

Purchased Electricity On Site Combustion

Ithaca Campus’s Energy Sources

•  Electricity Generation: Hydroelectric Dam (1904)

•  Cooling: Lake Source Cooling (2000) •  Conservation: Fully metered campus (2002) •  Heating: central plant with co-generated

electricity (1988, 2009) •  Grid Electricity: 115 kV substation (today) •  Total energy cost: about $60 million per year

Conservation Results: Building Energy Use History

12,500,000  

13,000,000  

13,500,000  

14,000,000  

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

FY_2000   FY_2003   FY_2006   FY_2009   FY_2012  

Area  (GSF)  Energy  Use  (MMBTU/YR)  

CHW  SALES_MMBTU  ELECTRIC  SALES_MMBTU  STEAM  SALES_MMBTU  CAMPUS  GSF  

North  Campus  West  Campus    

ECRF  &  EHOB  

Weill  Hall  

Duffield  

Physical  Sciences  &  AHDC  

Human  Ecology  

Milstein  

~170  kBtu/Sf-­‐Yr   ~150  kBtu/Sf-­‐Yr  

•  More conservation •  Occupant engagement in energy conservation

efforts •  Utility and building scale renewable projects •  Engineered geothermal with peaking gasified

biofuel for heating •  Community-oriented Offsets

What will Cornell’s energy future look like?

The Laboratory Part of the Picture

Laboratories constitute 33% of the floor space, but 50% of the energy budget

•  There are three competing priorities for operating laboratory facilities:

•  Science needs flexible spaces

•  Safety requires ongoing risk assessment and management

•  Sustainability requires careful energy management

This results in a complex system which needs to be carefully managed.

Supporting the Laboratory Mission: Safe, Sustainable Science

The Cornell Laboratory Ventilation Management Plan

We manage about 70 lab buildings with: !  Different ages and designs !  A variety of stakeholders !  Multiple priorities !  A goal of Continuous Improvement: It’s a systems problem!

Z9.5!

Z10!

The Lab Vent Management Indicators

Energy Indicator

Safety Indicator

Energy Indicator

Safety Indicator

Plan: Control banding labs

(leading)

Do: Hood housekeeping

scores (leading)

Check: energy use over time

(lagging)

Review: Track air quality

concerns (lagging)

Setting General Ventilation Rates through Control Banding

•  We start with 8/4 ACH (occupied/unoccupied) and look for opportunities to go 6/3 ACH

General Ventilation Control Band

Default Minimum Ventilation Rate

Drivers for this Recommendation  !

Examples

Normal ventilation 8 ACH / 4 ACH High intensity laboratory chemical use; especially use of chemicals with H224, H225, H226, H304, H330, H331, H332

GHS codes

Classroom labs with multiple bench

top sources of the same chemical;

or labs with poor distribution of

ventilation in the space!

 

Moderate ventilation

6 ACH / 3 ACH Chemical use with H334 and H335 that are restricted to local exhaust areas; no

significant sources on bench top

Laboratories with chemical use

outside hoods limited to

instrumentation, small bench top

operations, or closed systems

Low ventilation Less than “moderate” rates, determined by

review of lab work

Instrument labs and other spaces, that have no significant chemical sources

Machine shops without solvent use,

storage areas of non-volatile

chemicals

Lab-specific ventilation

Driven by non-chemical

considerations

Based on biosafety considerations; make up air concerns; temperature

concerns

BSL 3 laboratories; hood-driven

labs; labs with high heat producing

equipment

Risk Assessment Process

8/4 ACH!

6/3 ACH!

Case Study: Weill Hall

•  Life Sciences research •  Opened in 2008,

Certified LEED Gold •  Typical modern open lab design

Case Study: Weill Hall

•  Control banding review: •  156 ventilation zones were

reduced to 6/3 ACH •  32 zones stayed at 8/4 ACH •  18 labs put into vacancy mode

•  Control banding led to 20% savings in air flow

•  Other issues discovered added to the total savings for the project

Re-commissioning Discoveries

•  The system was tracking supply volumes rather than exhaust volumes in the labs.

•  Occupancy rates in offices were above ASHRAE rates (20 cfm per person).

•  The entire first floor dropped to 0 ACH in unoccupied mode.

•  Old exhaust settings file were loaded back into controls system; this wasn’t discovered for 6 months.

Key Lessons Learned

•  Documenting the LVMP allows determinations to be revisited on a regular basis

•  There are opportunities for energy conservation in LEED certified lab buildings

•  EH&S and ventilation experts need to work together to find those opportunities.

•  Building re-commissioning takes into consideration the whole system

•  Cornell Facilities Engineering •  Randy Lacey, University Engineer

•  Cornell Energy Management •  Lanny Joyce, Director, Energy

Management •  Erin Moore, Energy Outreach

Coordinator •  Cornell Sustainability Office

•  Dan Roth, Director •  Cornell EHS

•  Ellen Sweet, Lab Vent Specialist

Acknowledgments

For more details, (lots more details)

google “Cornell Climate Action Plan, 2013 update”"and “Cornell LVMP”"