SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  128
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
Transforming Our Institutions: The Harvard Green
         Campus Initiative Case Study




                        Leith Sharp,
                  Leith_sharp@harvard.edu
                       October 2008
Harvard’s Organizational
       Structure
Harvard’s Management Structure

• Highly decentralized
• Schools financially autonomous
• Strong individual identities & cultures of Schools


                             Corporation


                        President and Provost


               Vice Presidents             Deans


            Central Adminsitration         Schools
Harvard’s Population
Harvard University

Students
• 19,000 Degree Students
• 13,000 Fellows, non-degree & summer students
Faculty
• 2400 Faculty (on campus)
• 9000 Faculty (teaching hospitals)
Staff
• 12,000 Administrative Staff
Harvard’s Complexity
Complexity in Infrastructure




            Lab/studio           Library       Assembly &
              17%                  8%           Museum
                                                  6%
                                                              Support
                                                                5%

                                                            Commercial
                                                               5%
                                           Other
 Office &                                  15%
                                                              Athletic
Classroom
                                                                4%
   24%



                                                            Health care
                                                              0.4%
                   Residential
                     31%
Unknown Complexity in Decision Making

          Simple Lighting Retrofit Project

• Location: student residence (~300 students)

• Proposed savings:

  • Annual savings >$20,000
  • Payback <3 yrs

 Process…
Unknown Complexity in Decision Making

    Simple Lighting Retrofit Project
Unknown Complexity in Decision Making

                   Simple Lighting Retrofit Project



                                                      School

 HGCI                                     Fin Mgr (capital budget)
 Loan Fund                                Fin Mgr (operating budget)
               1                  2
                    Change                Facility Director
                    Agent                 Building Manager (Superintendent)

                                          House Master
Vendor
                             Univ. Ops    House occupants (students)
Sales Rep                                 REP coordinator (student)
Technician                   Maintenanc
                              e crew
Unknown Complexity in Decision Making

                     Simple Lighting Retrofit Project



                                                           School

 HGCI                                       4   Fin Mgr (capital budget)
 Loan Fund                                      Fin Mgr (operating budget)
                 1                  2
                      Change                    Facility Director
                      Agent                     Building Manager (Superintendent)

                                                House Master
Vendor       3
                               Univ. Ops        House occupants (students)
Sales Rep                                       REP coordinator (student)
Technician                     Maintenanc
                                e crew
Unknown Complexity in Decision Making

                     Simple Lighting Retrofit Project



                                                           School

 HGCI                                       4   Fin Mgr (capital budget)
 Loan Fund                                      Fin Mgr (operating budget)
                 1                  2
                      Change                    Facility Director 5
                                        6       Building Manager (Superintendent)
                      Agent

                                                House Master
Vendor       3
                               Univ. Ops        House occupants (students)
Sales Rep                                       REP coordinator (student)
Technician                     Maintenanc
                                e crew
Unknown Complexity in Decision Making

                    Simple Lighting Retrofit Project

• Full Process = 3 months of constant facilitation by
                        HGCI
                                                                        School

 HGCI                                                4       Fin Mgr (capital budget)
               2                                 1                                      1
 Loan Fund                                                   Fin Mgr (operating budget)
               0    1                            7                   8                  8
                1                        2
                    9 Change                                 Facility Director 5
                                             6           7
                      Agent                                  Building Manager (Superintendent)
                                     1                                           9
                               1                             House Master
                               4     0
Vendor     3          1                                            1               1
                               Univ. Ops     1               House occupants (students)
Sales Rep             5                                            2               1
                                             3               REP coordinator (student)
Technician 1                       Maintenanc
           6                        e crew
Harvard’s Growth
Harvard as Builder

• 600 campus buildings
• 21 million gross square feet
   (gsf) of floor space
• Historical trends
- 1 million gsf per decade
Harvard as Landowner



•  657 acres of campus land area
   – 219 acres in Cambridge
   – 22 acres in Longwood
   – 250 acres in Allston
   – 137 acres in Southborough
   – 29 acres in Watertown
• 4,100 acres of research land area
Harvard’s Environmental
        Impact
Harvard’s GHG
     Inventory: Annual
         Reporting

60+% growth in GHG emissions since 1992
Wide range in School GHG growth trends

FY06: Cambridge/Allston campus = 74%      Longwood Campus = 26%
Buildings account for over 87% of emissions (to power, heat & cool)
Three of Harvard’s 11 Schools account for 66% of campus emissions
Harvard’s Green Campus
       Initiative
Funding Models: Entrepreneurial Business Approach
                           Total
                      Full Time Staff
FY01                        1
FY02                        4
FY03                        8

FY04                        11

FY05                        11

FY06                        16


FY07                        19


FY08-FY09                  24+
Funding Models: Entrepreneurial Business Approach
             Base Program        Total               Annual
                 Funding    Full Time Staff         University
                                                     Savings
FY01        $ 80,000              1
FY02        $264,000              4           $400,000
FY03        $648,000              8           $700,000

FY04        $890,000              11          $1.5 million

FY05        $857,000              11          $3 million

FY06        $1,155,000            16          $5 million


FY07        $1,700,000            19          $6+million


FY08-FY09   $2,200,000           24+          $7+million
Funding Models: Entrepreneurial Business Approach

 Green Campus Loan Fund: $12 million interest-free capital for conservation
                                  projects
          Existing                            New Construction
          Buildings




          5 year payback                     10 year payback maximum
             maximum
                                              Lifecycle costing used
       Simple payback used

            $8.5+ million lent since 2001
            200+ projects
            30% average return on investment
Capacities: Time, Attention and Expertise
                  Harvard Green Campus Initiative:
                    Organizational Chart 2000


Co-Chair
Faculty, Harvard School of
Public Health
Prof. Jack Spengler




                Director,
                Leith Sharp



Co-Chair
Assoc. VP, Facilities &
Environmental Services
Tom Vautin




                                                          a
Capacities: Time, Attention and Expertise
                  Harvard Green Campus Initiative:
                    Organizational Chart 2000        Green Building Operations

                                                      Green Building Design
   Co-Chair
   Faculty, Harvard School of                        Campus Occupant Engagement Programs
   Public Health
   Prof. Jack Spengler
                                                     Environmental Procurement

   Director,                       23+ Full-time
                                   Staff             Residential Green Living Programs
   Leith Sharp
                                   20 Part-time
                                                     Renewable Energy
                                   students
   Co-Chair
   Assoc. VP, Facilities &                           HGCI Base Program Staff
   Environmental Services
   Tom Vautin



                                                     HGCI Courses at Harvard Extension School
                                                     •Sustainability – The Challenge of Changing Our
                                                     Institutions
                                                     •Green Building Design, Construction and Operations


♦ FY07Operating Cost = $1.6million ♦ Annual Savings = $6+ million & 90+ million pounds of
CO2
 20% Office of President and Provost & central administration sources.
10 Elements of Organizational Transformation
1.Change Attitudes and Assumptions
2.Engage People and Foster New Capacities
3.Assessment, Research and Development
4.Pilot and Expand New Practices
5.Process Quality Control & Continuous
  Improvement
6.Leverage Leadership
7.Reform Finance and Accounting Structures
8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention
9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks
1. Change Attitudes and Assumptions
Building Trust Based Relationships

                                             TRUST




     Three Types of
      Relationship
       Models in
     Organizations




   Transaction                                                  Authority


Reference: Professor Karen Stephenson, http://www.netform.com
1. Change Attitudes and Assumptions
 The Transformation of Hearts and Minds that Underpins Effective
   Organizational Transformation for Sustainability at Harvard

There is no problem because….the planet is an infinite source of resources with an infinite
capacity to absorb our pollution



There is a problem but it’s not mine because…..what I do has little impact on the planet, I
just don’t count, my influence is too small



There is a problem, I am involved, I probably could do something except it’s so hard……I
can’t get the funds, I don’t know how, I don’t have the time, I keep forgetting, my manager
doesn’t seem to want it, there’s no reliable alternative, it’s too risky, I don’t get evaluated on
it etc


            There is a problem and I am fully engaged in working on my part
                     of the solution in every way possible!
2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities




              Occupant impacts on
              building operations &
             environmental impacts
2. Engage People Motivation
                      and Foster New Capacities

                               MOTIVATION


There is much research to support the idea that learning is best served when
“motivation is intrinsic” that is to say when the individual is self-motivated
rather than externally motivated.
Experience that has no emotional engagement are not likely to be effective in
generating new mental representations.
Gardener, H. (1999) The Disciplined Mind: What All Students Should Understand. New
York: Simon & Schuster.
2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities

         PEER TO PEER PROGRAMS
       Harvard University Dining Services:
       Green Skillet Competition
Inter-Dining Hall Competition: 500+Dining Staff




       In 2007 The winning kitchen reduced electricity
                        use by 23%
2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities

                   PEER TO PEER PROGRAMS
                  Residential Green Living Programs
9,000+ students from the College, Harvard Business School, Harvard Law School,
                        Kennedy School of Government




    To reduce the environmental impact of dorm life at Harvard through…

•    Peer education, and awareness.          Major focuses
•    Practical projects in the dorms.        •   Electricity, heating, & water
•    Collaboration w/ administration to          efficiency
     identify barriers to conservation.      •   Reduce waste through re-
                                                 use and recycling
                                             •   Sustainable dining
In the College Quantified savings
            are now well over $400,000/year.

• >13.8%reduction in electricity use
of dorms by 2007
• >4% reduction in fuel for heating
• 33% reduction in food waste
• 25% increase in recycling
• $50,000 annual water savings
• >60% reduction in move-out trash
• >$75,000/year of reusable items
salvaged and resold by REP and
Habitat
2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities
                                         Targeted Behavioral Change
                                       SHUT YOUR SASH COMPETITION

                   Harvard Medical
                   School
                   Faculty of Arts
                   and Sciences

                            HMS Fume Hood quot;Shut the Sashquot; Campaign
                                Average Sash Height & Energy Cost per Hood

                                                                                     $2,500
                  14




                                                                                              Avg Energy Cost /
Avg Sash Height




                  12                                                                 $2,000




                                                                                                Hood / year
                  10
   (inches)




                                                                                     $1,500
                   8
                   6                                                                 $1,000
                   4
                                                                                     $500
                   2
                   0                                                                 $0
                                                                                                                  Over $250,000 of
                            WAB          HIM         Bldg C    SGM         Arm                                    energy savings from
                       Pre-Campaign Sash Height     Building   Post Campaign Sash Height                          this targeted
                       Baseline avg cost / hood / year         Post Campaign avg cost / hood / year               competition
2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities
        Large Scale Social Marketing Campaigns

2007 OnlineServices – 3 complexes (1,800 tenants) – 10 REPs
  Harvard Real Estate
                      Sustainability Pledge
Last year over 8,000 8 dorms (700 students) – 4 REPs
   Harvard Law School – people signed!

    Harvard Business School – 5 dorms (420-students) – 6 REPs
                                            5,700 people pledged to turn
                                       off computers and lights at
                                       night.

                                        - 5,400 people pledged to
                                       enable sleep mode on their
                                       computer.

                                        - 3,700 people pledged to buy
                                       at least 30% recycled paper.

                                        - 4,600 people pledged to
                                       double-side copies.

                                        - 3,821 people pledged to bring
                                       their own coffee mug.
2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities
Certoon: Annual Campus Energy Reduction Cartoon
 Competition in the College
3. Assessment, Research and Development
3. Assessment, Research and Development
                                What is the Cost of LEED?
    Over 20 LEED Projects at Harvard show that there are 34 credits and 6
prerequisites that can be achieved at no added cost if the process is managed
                                 effectively.
Included in this number are 9 credits that all Harvard projects immediately get.
         45
                       40
         40

         35

         30

         25

         20

         15
                                                 11                                                 10
         10

         5                                                                 3

         0
                                                                                                                     Silver = 33
               Point is no cost and   Potential cost impact,        Point has cost       Point has additional cost
              often given in Harvard but will result in reduced   implication and an      impact with strictly an    Gold = 39
                     projects            operations costs         associated human         environment benefit
                                                                   health / comfort /
                                                                  productivity benefit
                                                                                                                     Platinum=52
Building Energy Assessments, Tracking & Reporting

  HGCI has identified over 200 energy conservation measures in 60 building
    complexes within a 12 month period for Harvard Real Estate Service.
                                                                                                              Baseline Summary
                                                                                                           Peabody Terrace Apartments

                  Square Feet                  Units                  Occupants                                            Build Manager                                                     Org #                          UOS Bldg #
                    450849                     495                       696                                                Pam Cornell                                                      53830                            425

                                   Heating Source                                               Cooling Source                                                         Utilities Included in Rent                 Water Billing
                      TRUE
                       Blackstone Steam            FALSE
                                                  #2 Fuel Oil                                  FALSE Water
                                                                                                  Chilled                                 FALSE AC
                                                                                                                                            Window                          Water and Sewer TRUE               FALSE
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Monthly
                      FALSE Gas
                       Natural                     FALSE
                                                  #4 Fuel Oil                                  FALSE                                      FALSE
                                                                                                                                            Geothermal                      Electricity     TRUE               TRUEQuarterly
                                                                                                  Chiller On-site
                      FALSE
                       Electricity                 FALSE
                                                  #6 Fuel Oil                                  TRUE                                                                         Heat            TRUE
                                 1                                                                       None                                                                               TRUE

                                                                                               Annual                                                                                       Usage /
                                          Utility                                             Baseline                     Baseline Years                              Usage / SF          Occupant
                                          Electricity (kWh)                                  2,265,043                     FY 2006-2007                                      5.024          3254.372
                                          Natural Gas (therms)                                   5,044                     FY 2006-2007                                      0.011            7.248
                                          Steam (MMBTU)                                         24,956                     FY 2006-2007                                      0.055           35.856
                                          Water (ccf)                                           31,023                     FY 2006-2007                                      0.069           44.573
                                          Chilled Water (Ton-Days)                                   0                                       -                                  -               -
                                          #2 Fuel Oil (gallons)                                      0                                       -                                  -               -
                                          #4 Fuel Oil (barrels)                                      0                                       -                                  -               -
                                          #6 Fuel Oil (barrels)                                  0                               -                                              -              -
                                          Combined Heating (KBTU)                           24,956,034                     FY 2006-2007                                      55.353        35856.371
                                          Total KBTU                                        33,189,118                     FY 2006-2007                                      73.615        47685.514
                                                   Electricity                                                                                                                                   Heating
                                           Normalized Annual Usage and Cost                              kWhs                                                      Normalized Annual Usage and Cost                KBTU
                                                                                                         Cost                                                                                                      Cost
                          3,000,000                                                                                    800,000                                 30,000,000                                                      700,000
                                                                                                                       700,000                                                                                                 600,000
                          2,500,000                                                                                                                            25,000,000
                                                                                                                       600,000
                          2,000,000                                                                                                                                                                                            500,000
                                                                                                                       500,000                                 20,000,000
                                                                                                                            Cost ($)
                   kWhs




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Cost ($)
                                                                                                                                                    KBTUs
                          1,500,000                                                                                    400,000                                                                                                 400,000
                                                                                                                                                               15,000,000
                                                                                                                       300,000                                                                                                 300,000
                          1,000,000
                                                                                                                       200,000                                 10,000,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                               200,000
                            500,000
                                                                                                                       100,000                                  5,000,000                                                      100,000
                                   0                                                                                   0
                                          Fiscal 2006     Fiscal 2007    Fiscal 2008   Fiscal 2009       Fiscal 2010                                                   0                                                       0


                                                             Water                                                                                                                             Chilled Water
                                           Normalized Annual Usage and Cost                                Ccfs                                                             Normalized Annual Usage and Cost              Ton-Days
                                                                                                           Cost                                                                                                           Cost
                          35,000                                                                                       300,000                                 1                                                                     1
                          30,000                                                                                                                               1                                                                     1
                                                                                                                       250,000
                                                                                                                                                               1                                                                     1
                          25,000
                                                                                                                       200,000                                 1                                                                     1
                                                                                                                               Cost ($)




                                                                                                                                                    Ton-Days




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Cost ($)
                          20,000
                   Ccfs




                                                                                                                                                               1                                                                     1
                                                                                                                       150,000
                          15,000                                                                                                                               1                                                                     1
                                                                                                                       100,000                                 0                                                                     0
                          10,000
                                                                                                                                                               0                                                                     0
                           5,000                                                                                       50,000                                  0                                                                     0
                              0                                                                                        0                                       0                                                                     0
                                       Fiscal 2006      Fiscal 2007     Fiscal 2008    Fiscal 2009       Fiscal 2010                                           0                                                                     0
Onsite Renewable Energy


                        Big Belly Trash
                         Compactors

  Photovoltaic
                                              Ground Source Heat
                                                   Pumps




                 Collecting oil for Harvard    Building Mounted
Solar Thermal
                      Recycling truck                Wind
Technology Comparison
                          PV               Wind                Solar
                                                              Thermal
   $/20 yr            $.25-.35           $.03-.12              $.24
   kWh
   $/20 yr           $400-550           $100-200              $70-350
   MTCDE

Note: costs are AFTER rebates for PV and wind and factored over 20 years
              Solar thermal is not eligible for MTC rebates
4. Pilot and Expand New Practices
4. Pilot and Expand New Practices




                                     Occupancy sensor driven
                                     temperature Setbacks
Biodiesel in University Shuttles




Ground Source Heat Pumps           Green Cleaning
4. Pilot and Expand New Practices



    Harvard University
    Diesel Emission Controls
   For Construction Equipment
Process to Implementation
 • Trial, Education, Buy-In, Meetings…




Harvard Transportation Services Vehicle
Harvard Emissions Spec
• Retrofits - 60HP+ onsite 20+ working days
• EPAs verified list, or approved by Harvard
• Ultra Low Sulfur Deisel. Preference for
  biodiesel, ethanol
• Anti-idling, equipment location, electric
  equipment
Retrofitted
 Vehicles
4. Pilot and Expand New Practices

                Green Building at Harvard :History
  2001: HGCI
initiates first 3
  pilot LEED
    projects

   2004                   2005                 2006                  2007            2008


7 LEED Projects     16 LEED Projects    21 LEED Projects    26 LEED Projects    50+ LEED Projec
   2 Certified          4 Certified         5 Certified         7 Certified         12 Certified
   5 Registered         12 Registered       16 Registered       19 Registered       38 Registere
Levels of
LEED
Ratings                                 52-69
                                        points


                                         39-51
                                         points


                                         33-38
                                         points
            Green Buildings
            worldwide are certified
            with a voluntary,            26-32
                                         points
            consensus-based
            rating system.
            USGBC has four
            levels of LEED.
                           Test
                                      Source: www.usgbc.org
Dunster / Mather Kitchen and Serveries                            LEED Silver Certified
First Institution Kitchen to Achieve LEED, Dual-Flush Toilets, Melink Variable Speed Drive Stove
                                                                     Hoods, Composting System




                                                                Harvard Dining Services
Aldrich Hall                                               LEED Silver Pending
     Campus Lighting Master Plan, Preferred Parking for Fuel Efficient Vehicles, Green
 Cleaning Program, high performance ventilation 13 Filters, 80% C&D Waste Diversion




                                                         Harvard Business School
90 Mt. Auburn St.                                                       LEED Gold Certified
Ground Source Heat Pumps, No Irrigation, Indoor Air Quality Testing Prior to Occupancy,
              Untreated Concrete Floors and Walls, Green Cleaning for All of HRES U&C,




 Photo by: Nathan Gauthier                            Photo by: Nathan Gauthier




                                                               Harvard University Library
First Science Center                                     Seeking LEED Gold
             Highest energy performance goal of any lab design at Harvard, careful
                        attention to materials selections, onsite stormwater re-use




                                                        Allston Development
46 Blackstone                                            LEED Platinum Certified
Submitted to USGBC in September, 55 Points Pending – 52 Required for LEED Platinum,
  Highest energy performance of any Harvard LEED building, bioswale, energy efficient
                                                                            elevator




                                                          University Operations
                                                                Services
Landmark Center, HSPH                                           LEED Certified
42,000 Build-Out, Underfloor Air Distribution, Digitally controlled Lighting w/T-5 Lamps




                                                           Harvard School of Public
                                                                    Health
5. Process Improvement
5. Process Improvement
                               Did someone leave and
    Do we need some
                               momentum lost?
    in time research?                              Is there some unfounded
                                                   perception of risk or
 Do we need more                                   misunderstanding
 management support?                               preventing engagement?

Has it fallen off the agenda                       Did we consider life cycle
due to other priorities?                           costs, rebates, grants,
                                                   integrated design related
Is the bigger picture                              savings etc?
still being addressed?
                                                   Does anyone have the
 Does something have to                            time to project manage
 be done and no else                               this properly?
 knows how to do it?
                                                   Are we re-inventing the
     Are we missing someone                        wheel instead of using
     important at the table?                       what’s been done
                                                   already?
Continuously Diagnose and Address the Weakest Links in Every Process
Process Quality Control & Continuous Improvement
             5. Process Improvement
Ten Commandments for Cost Effective Green Building
          Construction & Renovations
                       1. Commitment
                       2. Leadership
                       3. Accountability
                       4. Process Management
                       5. Integrated Design
                       6. Energy Modeling
                       7. Commissioning Plus
                       8. Specifications
                       9. Life Cycle Costing
                       10.Continuous Improvement
46 Blackstone                                                   LEED Platinum Certified
 Submitted to USGBC in September, 55 Points Pending – 52 Required for LEED Platinum, Highest
           energy performance of any Harvard LEED building, bioswale, energy efficient elevator




                                                                  University Operations
                                                                        Services
Developing Stormwater Strategies     .




Original site consisted of 100% impervious
                  surfaces
658 tons of asphalt were removed and recycled
Demo of exterior structures to create open space and future Bioswale
Creating a permeable surface for the courtyard




                     Installing high-albedo pavers on stone base
Bioremediation system for surface water treatment
Bioswale treats all water from 25,000 s.f. parking lot
Storm run-off on the site is reduced by 35% to 51%




Drainage to municipal sewer system eliminated.
A serious commitment to construction waste management




       99% waste diversion through reuse and recycling
Daylight and Views




 •Daylight access to over 75% of spaces
 •View access to over 90% of spaces
Daylight and Views
Energy Efficient Lighting




                Daylight and
             occupant sensing
            fluorescent lighting




       Full cut-off exterior lighting
Plumbing




43% reduction in water use from
       EPAct Standards
Thermal Insulation and Vapor Barrier



                    Application of Icynene Foam
Reflective Roofing and Operable Windows



                        Window features:
                        • Double pane, argon-filled low-e glass
                        • U value .25




    Roof Specifications:
    • Solar reflectance 65%
    • Emittance .92
    • U values .024 to .032
HVAC Design Strategy

• Right-size the design:
  – capacities to match building envelope thermal
    performance

• Minimize energy use in delivery systems
  – Air handler for ventilation only (100% fresh air)
  – Energy recovery from exhaust air (enthalpy wheel)
  – Fan-less valence units for space heating and cooling
  – Variable frequency drives on all pumps
Energy Use


Designed to be 40+ %
more energy efficient
than ASHRAE 90.1
Mechanical Systems
• Cooling: ground-source heat pumps
• Heating: hot water from steam
• DDC controls:
  –   Outside air reset
  –   Occupancy sensors
  –   CO2 monitors
  –   Variable air volume
Air Handler/Heat Recovery System
                • Provides up to 5100 CFM of 100%
                  outside air for ventilation
                • Enthaply energy recovery system is
                  80% efficient
                • Ventilation is demand controlled
                with occupancy and CO2 sensors
Sustainable and Renewable Materials




                                 Concrete Counters




Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certified Wood
Sustainable Carpeting Materials

Recycled, recyclable, PVC-free, low VOC carpet
tiles




 Bamboo flooring




                                    Low VOC adhesives and
                                    sealants
Reused Systems Furniture




    Refurbished furniture with recycled materials
Remember this?
And now…
TRADITION DESIGN PROCESS
A typical process involves a linear progression from the architect
down to the engineers and finally the contractors. A strict
hierarchy of communication is enforced by the project manager.
                                  Architects


    www.aangepastbouwen.nl




                                  Engineers


             www.hansa-klima.de




                              Contractors
Integrated Design
  An Integrated Design Process is a more iterative process that provides
  additional flexibility and dynamism in the engagement of all team members so
  that there is scope for ongoing learning and the capacity to address emergent
  features and strategies.
  The project team is still required to adhere to clear communication protocols to
  minimize conflict and confusion, however there are more deliberate
  opportunities for cross communication between team members.
  The design charrette is a key forum for integrated design.

                           Architects                     Engineers




Source: Leith Sharp 2008                Contractors
Integrated Design Requires Inclusiveness and Collaboration

  Conventional Design Process                                                              Integrated Design Process
  Involves team members only when essential                                                Inclusive from the outset

  Less time, energy, and collaboration exhibited                                           Front-loaded — time and energy invested early
  in early stages
  More decisions made by fewer people                                                      Decisions influenced by broad team

  Linear process                                                                           Iterative process

  Systems often considered in isolation                                                    Whole-systems thinking

  Limited to constrained optimization                                                      Allows for full optimization

  Diminished opportunity for synergies                                                     Seeks synergies

  Emphasis on up-front costs                                                               Life-cycle costing

  Typically finished when construction is                                                  Process continues through post-occupancy
  complete



Source: ‘Roadmap for the Integrated Design Process’. Prepared Busby Perkins+Will, Stantec Consulting
The Integrated Design Process is as Much a Mindset as it is a
                         Process
The Integrated Design Process is as Much a Mindset as it is a
                                Process

                 Mindset                                                Principle                               Strategies

  Inclusion & collaboration                          Broad collaborative team                          • Careful team formation
  Outcome oriented                                   Well-defined scope,                               • Team building
                                                     vision, goals & objectives
  Trust & transparency                               Effective & open communication                    • Facilitation training for team
                                                                                                       • Expert facilitation

  Open-mindedness &                                  Innovation and synthesis                          • Visioning charrettes (with
  creativity                                                                                           comprehensive preparation)
                                                                                                       • Brainstorming

  Rigor & attention to detail                        Systematic decision-making                        • Goals and targets matrix
                                                                                                       • Decision-making tools
  Continuous learning                                • Iterative process with feedback                 • Post-occupancy evaluation
  and improvement                                    cycles                                            • Comprehensive
                                                                                                       commissioning




Source: ‘Roadmap for the Integrated Design Process’. Prepared Busby Perkins+Will, Stantec Consulting
The Management Challenge of Integrated Design
The integrated design process requires skillful management. A number of integrated design
process management recommendations include:
  Ask for it up front, include it in the RFPs, Owners Project Requirements etc
  Select design team members with experience in integrated design where possible.
  Include design team members at the right time, such as operational representatives,
  commissioning agent, sustainability consultant, cost estimator, controls engineer etc
  Engage the team in a process of internalizing all sustainability and project goals.
  Establish an early dynamic of trust and mutual understanding across the team as the
  foundation of effective collaboration.
  Undertake a design charrette with full team participation to develop strategies and
  allocate roles and responsibilities
  Carefully and consistently diagnose when to bring the team together, when to drive them
  to collaborate and when to implement linear task sequence management.
  Continuously ask why particular strategies are being recommended and what other
  options have been considered
  Implement modeling strategies & life cycle costing to evaluate impacts of design options
  Ensure the effective engagement of operations staff, the commissioning agent to ensure
  the design meets operational needs
6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions
6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions

Grass Roots                                CONFIDENCE & CAPACITY
Students, building Managers,               •Evidence
facilities staff, project managers,        •Confidence
custodial, transport & procurement staff   •Business base for green
                                           campus organization


Top Level Leadership                       AUTHORITY
President, Provost, Deans,                 •Legitimacy
VP’s                                       •Priority
                                           •Mood/culture
                                           •Goals


Upper Middle Management                    SYSTEMS INTEGRATION
2nd Level Deans, Associate VP’s,           •Capital Approvals Systems
CFOs, COO - Planning                       •Finance & Accounting
                                           •University Contracts
6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions
                  Leverage Leadership


       Harvard-Wide Green Building Guidelines:
                Development Process
Development and Approval Process
• 2001-4: LEED piloted and numerous projects
  underway
• 2004: President Summers: Approves Sustainability
  Principles including a commitment to integrate
  sustainability into capital approvals process.
• 2004-7: LEED project experience expanded across
  the University
• Feb 2007: University Construction Managers Council
  asked HGCI to establish interfaculty sub-committee
  to draft guidelines
• March – Oct: Guidelines developed by HGCI and
  interfaculty committee over 11 meetings
6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions
                  Leverage Leadership

         Harvard-Wide Green Building Guidelines:
                  Development Process
Development and Approval Process: Oct-Dec 2007
• Financial Deans: Approval
• Capital Projects Review Committee: Approval
• University Construction Managers Council: Approval
• Administrative Deans: Approval
• University Construction Managers Council : Approve final draft
• President Faust: Notified of completion and adoption
Ongoing Efforts:
• Green Building Guidelines Committee: Tasked to review LEED
  Gold option through 2008
• Harvard Green Campus Initiative: Tasked to integrate
  guidelines into University contracts & standards, provide
  training and project support to all Schools and Departments
7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures
Accounting Structures Are Getting in the Way of
                    Best Financial Practice


                  Barrier: Accounting
                 structures are driving
Capital Budget
                 inefficient design and        Maintenance Budget
  Managers       operations by limiting             Managers

                     the appropriate
                      movement of
                    investments and
                         savings
Utility Budget                                 Human Resources
  Managers                                        Managers
7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures

                 Green Campus Loan Fund
$12 Million Fund - interest free capital for high performance
projects
    Existing Buildings                     New Construction




  5 Year Payback Maximum              10 Year payback maximum
     Full project funded                Cost premium of high
     Can bundle projects              performance option funded
    Simple payback used                Life Cycle Costing used
7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures
                    Green Campus Loan Fund
$12 Million Fund - interest free capital for high performance projects

      Existing Buildings                    New Construction




           $12 million interest-free capital for conservation projects

          +$8.5 million lent since 2001
          ~200 projects
          30% average return on investment
7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures

Provide Financial Access to the Champions
7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures


                            HARVARD
                     Green Building Guidelines

•   Capital projects exceeding $5 million will seek minimum LEED
    Silver certification.
•   Harvard University requires a number of LEED credits to be treated
    as pre-requisites (including minimum 6 energy credits ~2030 Challenge)
•   An “Integrated Design” approach is to be adopted.
•   Life Cycle Costing assessment is to be conducted throughout the
    project
•   Energy modeling is required
•   Adopt an ongoing commissioning approach for the life of the building.
Life Cycle Costing

     A method of project evaluation in which all costs
     arising from owning, operating, maintaining and
 ultimately disposing of a project over an agreed period
  are accounted for and converted into today’s dollars.
 In short, life cycle costing allows for the consideration
  of medium and long term cost implications of today’s
                         decisions.

            When can it be used?
            ► New Construction
            ► Major Renovations
              ► Capital Projects
   ► Routine Replacements or Upgrades
► Day to day purchases that incur any ongoing
                   costs
When Should We Introduce the LCC Approach in the Building Design
                           Process?
      Get in Early and Get in Ugly!         ( Favourite quote from GRT!)
Simplest Use of Life Cycle Costing




Present Value of the       Present Value of
  Investment Costs     +      Operational
                                Costs


    Present Value = All costs in today’s
                     $
                                       Provided by Bob Charette
How Should LCC Be Used in the
  Decision Making Process?

  1. To compare different options (e.g. ground
 source heat pumps versus natural gas furnace)

2. To determine financially optimal efficiency level
            (e.g. amount of insulation)

3. To identify medium and long term savings for
potential reinvestment or immediate justification
          of integrated design solutions
1. To compare different options (e.g. ground
source heat pumps versus natural gas furnace)
Vacuum Pump Replacement Study
                                             Escalation
Discount Rate                          8.00% Rate                              3.50%


                          Option 1                  Option 2            Option 3
Name                          Water Seal                Dry Claw
Description                    Existing             Replacement
Annual Utility Cost       $    38,768.20            $ 15,030.41
Annual Maintenance Cost   $      440.00             $      190.00
First Cost                $                -        $ 46,500.00
Year 10 Replacement       $    47,340.00            $ 61,147.50
Year 20 Replacement       $    59,940.00            $ 77,422.50
Years                                          20                  20


Total Net Present Value   $ 808,819.73              $ 457,403.89
Savings                              $ 351,415.84
Life Cycle Cost Analysis                    Scenario 6: >Break Even Annual Costs (5.58 MMBTU/week)
                                                                 >Malkin Perspective
  General Assumptions
  Maintenance Escalation      3.50%
  Discount Rate               5.75%
                                            Gas Boilers                                  Central Steam (oil/gas)
  FY2007 Rates                                     $3,725        FY07 Maintenance Cost        $0
                                                                   Annual Gas Usage
  Gas (per therm)              $1.55               3,946                                       0
                                                                       (therms)
  Steam (per MMBTU)
                                                                  Annual Steam Usage
  [includes fuel, non-fuel,   $29.00                 0                                        339
                                                                       (MMBtu)
  and distribution]
                                                  $9,841          FY2007 Annual             $9,841
   Maintenance       Gas    Repair Net Annual   Present Value                             Present Value Net Annual Repair   Steam Maintenance
      Cost           Cost    Cost     Cost      Annual Costs              Year            Annual Costs     Cost     Cost     Cost    Cost
         $3,855      $6,116            $9,972           $9,429    FY   2008      1                 $9,694  $10,252          $10,252        $0
         $3,990      $6,353           $10,343           $9,249    FY   2009      2                 $9,629  $10,768          $10,768        $0
         $4,130      $6,550           $10,680           $9,031    FY   2010      3                 $9,564  $11,311          $11,311        $0
         $4,275      $6,787           $11,062           $8,845    FY   2011      4                 $9,497  $11,877          $11,877        $0
         $4,424      $7,024           $11,448           $8,656    FY   2012      5                 $9,435  $12,478          $12,478        $0
         $4,579      $7,270           $11,849           $8,472    FY   2013      6                 $9,234  $12,915          $12,915        $0
         $4,739      $7,524           $12,263           $8,292    FY   2014      7                 $9,038  $13,367          $13,367        $0
         $4,905      $7,787           $12,693           $8,115    FY   2015      8                 $8,846  $13,835          $13,835        $0
         $5,077      $8,060           $13,137           $7,943    FY   2016      9                 $8,657  $14,319          $14,319        $0
         $5,254      $8,342 $7,053    $20,650          $11,806    FY   2017      10                $8,876  $15,525   $705   $14,820        $0
         $5,438      $8,634           $14,072           $7,608    FY   2018      11                $8,293  $15,339          $15,339        $0
         $5,629      $8,936           $14,565           $7,446    FY   2019      12                $8,116  $15,876          $15,876        $0
         $5,826      $9,249           $15,075           $7,288    FY   2020      13                $7,944  $16,431          $16,431        $0
         $6,030      $9,573           $15,602           $7,133    FY   2021      14                $7,775  $17,006          $17,006        $0
         $6,241      $9,908           $16,148           $6,981    FY   2022      15                $7,609  $17,602          $17,602        $0
         $6,459     $10,255           $16,714           $6,833    FY   2023      16                $7,447  $18,218          $18,218        $0
         $6,685     $10,613           $17,299           $6,687    FY   2024      17                $7,289  $18,855          $18,855        $0
         $6,919     $10,985           $17,904           $6,545    FY   2025      18                $7,134  $19,515          $19,515        $0
         $7,161     $11,369           $18,531           $6,406    FY   2026      19                $6,982  $20,198          $20,198        $0
         $7,412     $11,767 $9,994    $29,173           $9,536    FY   2027      20                $7,159  $21,900   $995   $20,905        $0

                                                                     20 Year Net
                                                 $162,302                                  $168,219
                                                                    Present Cost
2. To determine financially optimal efficiency
       level (e.g. amount of insulation)
How Much Insulation?




  Inches        0     1     2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9     10      11


Upfront Cost   $45   $50   $55    $60    $65    $70    $75    $80    $85    $90    $95    $100


Energy Use      4    3.2   2.56   2.05   1.64   1.31   1.05   0.84   0.67   0.54   0.43   0.34
How Much Insulation?
                           Energy
              Cash Year       Per Energy 20
 Insulation        20        Year    Years
0 Inches         -$63.43        5    100.00
1 Inches         -$36.77     4.00     80.00
2 Inches         -$16.14     3.20     64.00
3 Inches          -$0.73     2.56     51.20
4 Inches          $9.03      2.05     40.96
5 Inches         $13.64      1.64     32.77
6 Inches         $14.12      1.31     26.21
7 Inches         $11.30      1.05     20.97       Using an
                                              integrated design
8 Inches          $5.83      0.84     16.78
                                                approach you
9 Inches          -$1.73     0.67     13.42      may be able
10 Inches         -$8.66     0.54     10.74       eliminate
                                                 mechanical
11 Inches        -$12.57     0.43      8.59
                                                equipment to
                                               justify this cost
3. To identify medium and long term savings for
       potential reinvestment or immediate
   justification of integrated design solutions
A Financial Model for Climate Neutrality
YALE: Campus GHG Reduction Framework: Progress to Date


                                           A nnual C am pus Em issions
Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent




                                                                                                  5   Y
                                                                                               0 0 OR
                                                                                           E -2 C T
                                                                                         PR AJ E
                                                                                          TR
                                                                                                                                              C O N S E R VA TIO N
                                                    YA L E A N N O U N C EM EN T




                                                                                   RE                                                         R E N EW A B LE
                                                                                        DU                                                    E N ER G Y
                                                                                             CT
                                                                                                  IO
                                                                                                       N
                                                                                                           PA
                                                                                                                TH
                                                                                                                     IF
                                                            P R O G R E SS TO D AT E                                      LI
                                                                                                                               NE            C A R BO N O FFS ET
                                                            • 8 % r educ tion f rom 04 p eak                                        AR
                                                                                                                                             P R O JEC TS

                                                            • 1 3 % below Pre -2005 Tra jecto ry
                                                                                                                                    G O AL
                                                            •1. 5% C am p us G S F Incre ase sinc e ‘05




                                                        Ivy Plus Sustainability Meeting
                                                          2008 Campus GHG Report
CORNELL: GHG Reduction Plan and Strategies
                                   400
                                       Emissions without
                                       Energy Initiatives &
                                   350
                                       CHPP (2000-2012)
GHG Emissions (metric kilo-tons)




                                                                                                          Status Quo
                                   300
                                                                 Kyoto Target by 2012                      Green Development

                                   250
                                                                                                           Energy Conservation
                                   200
                                          Actuals
                                   150
                                                                                                           Fuel Mix

                                   100
                                                Projected 2007-2012
                                                with CCHPP in 2010
                                    50
                                                                                                           Renewable Energy
                                                                                                           / Offsets
                                     0
                                     2000      2005       2010      2015    Future: 2025 2030 2035
                                                                             2020    Climate Neutral    2040
                                                                              Year



                                                                      Ivy Plus Sustainability Meeting
                                                                        2008 Campus GHG Report
Accounting Reform for Building Climate
              Neutrality

   Adopting 20 years net present value accounting
framework for evaluating carbon neutrality investment
       and return options for each building.
   Track and reinvest savings from energy demand
   reductions to fund onsite renewable energy, fuel
  switching, additional efficiency efforts and carbon
                        offsets.
Costing Case Study

Building Name          Leverett Towers F & G
Department             Faculty of Arts and Sciences
Description            Complex of 2 11-story towers
Age                    Built 1959; renovations every 4 years
Size                   121,697 square feet
Occupancy              158 suites, 20 tutor apartments; 300 residents
Demographics           Undergraduates, graduate tutors
Lease format           Academic year appointments; temporary summer housing
Building systems and   Heat/ventilation: Steam to forced air and radiant heat;
utilities              Hot water: steam
                       Air conditioning: window units
                       Electricity: tutor kitchenette appliances
                       Natural gas: dryers (1990-2001 only)
2006 GHG emissions     1537 MTCDE

                                                                                 114
Costing Case Study
                        (Research provided by Debra Shepard 2008)

Leverett Towers Investment Summary
                                              % of
                                                         Investment Period   MTCDE/yr
                   Component                 Portfolio
     Energy Conservation Measures
     Renewable Energy Technology                 17%            2007-2009         255
     (onsite)                                      3%           2007-2009           49
     Fuel Switch                                 22%            2012-2020         345
     Offsets                                     58%            2012-2020         888
     Behavior Program                           ((2%))          2007-2020        ((33))
Costing Case Study
                        (Research provided by Debra Shepard 2008)

Leverett Towers Investment Summary
                                                % of
                                                            Investment Period                  MTCDE/yr
                   Component                   Portfolio
     Energy Conservation Measures
     Renewable Energy Technology                    17%             2007-2009                                         255
     (onsite)                                        3%             2007-2009                                              49
     Fuel Switch                                    22%             2012-2020                                         345
     Offsets                                        58%             2012-2020                                         888
     Behavior Program                              ((2%))           2007-2020                                        ((33))



erette Towers Financial Summary for Climate Neutrality
                                                                                        Leverett Tow ers:
                                                       Net present value         Climate Neutral Portfolio at 2020



   Financial Category                                      through 2020                             17%



   Investments (ECM, RET, Fuel Switch, Behavior)            ($1,068,958)                                    3%

                                                                                                                       ECMs
                                                                                                                       RETs
   Savings (ECM, RET, and Behavior)                          $1,142,947    58%
                                                                                                                       Fuel Sw itch
                                                                                                             22%       Offsets


   Carbon Offset Purchases                                    ($68,268)
   TOTAL PROGRAM Net Present Value                               $5,721                                              116
Designing Programs for the Way We Are
8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention
     by Institutionalizing New Practices
Designing Programs for the Way We Are
  8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention
       by Institutionalizing New Practices
                   Conscious Engagement
The findings of many studies suggest that the conscious self “plays a causal
role only 5% of the time” There is an active effort on behalf of the mind to
make what is conscious unconscious as quickly as possible.
While conscious choice and guidance are needed to perform new tasks, after
some repetition, conscious choice quickly drops out and unconscious habit
takes over, freeing up precious reserves of conscious awareness.
Bargh, J. A. and Chartrand, T.L. (1999) The unbearable automaticity of being.
American Psycologist, 54 (7) 462-479
Designing Programs for the Way We Are
  8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention
       by Institutionalizing New Practices
                   Conscious Engagement

The findings of many studies suggest that the conscious self “plays a causal
role only 5% of the time” There is an active effort on behalf of the mind to
make what is conscious unconscious as quickly as possible.
While conscious choice and guidance are needed to perform new tasks, after
some repetition, conscious choice quickly drops out and unconscious habit
takes over, freeing up precious reserves of conscious awareness.
Bargh, J. A. and Chartrand, T.L. (1999) The unbearable automaticity of being.
American Psycologist, 54 (7) 462-479




               Implications for Creating a Learning Organization
•Make it a habit ASAP
•Institutionalize using organizational systems ASAP


                                                               5% Conscious
                                                                 Behavior
8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention
         Designing Programs for the Way We Are
          by Institutionalizing New Practices

EXAMPLES:
•Adopt new financial approval requirements
•Integrate new practices into contracts and specifications ASAP
•Redefine position descriptions, performance reviews & training programs
•Implement prompts & visible cues to trigger behavior (signs, bins, emails)
•Formalize new annual reporting requirements
•Establish routines of regular meetings and agenda items
9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks
9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks
                                 Cambridge vs Longwood Emissions


                                                                       247,224
        250,000
                                                             233,663
                                        220,407   219,104

                            204,449

        200,000




                  145,572
        150,000
MTCDE




                                                                                 Cambridge
                                                                                 Longwood
                                                             110,995   114,054


        100,000
                                                   85,914




                                                                                             Life Cycle Costing
                  63,293
                            52,930
                                        48,723
         50,000




             0



                                                                                             Finance and Accounting Frameworks
                   FY90      FY02        FY04      FY04       FY05      FY06




        GHG Reduction Targets




                                                                                      Green Building Standards
Summary of Ivy GHG Commitments in 2008

Brown University
42% below 2007 baseline by 2020
Columbia University
30% below 2005 levels by 2017 [in line with PlaNYC]
Cornell University
Signed Presidents Climate Commitment. Will have strategic plan including timetable in 2009
   (already have 7% below 1990)
Harvard University
30% below 2006 by 2016 including all growth (which equates to a net 50% reduction)
University of Pennsylvania
Signed Presidents Climate Commitment. Will have strategic plan including timetable Sept 2009
Princeton University
1990 levels by 2020 (18% reduction from 2007)
Yale University
43% reduction from 2005 (10% below 1990) by 2020



  Ivy Plus Sustainability Meeting
  2008 Campus GHG Report
9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks

Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy
The Allston Sustainability Guidelines chart a course for Harvard to reduce the
emissions of its new campus in Allston by over 80% compared to a conventional
campus.

                                                   A llston E m issions R eduction S trategy
                                                                                                                                                                      B uildings w ill use
                                30,000
                                                                                                                                                                      40% less energy
                                                                                         C onventional D evelopm ent                                                  than stipulated by
                                25,000
                                                                                                                                                                      A S H R A E 90.1
     Allston Emissions (MTCE)




                                                                                                                                                                      E nergy generation
                                20,000                                                                                                                                w ill be 30% m ore
                                                                                                                                                                      efficient than current
                                                                                                                                                                      H arvard standards
                                15,000
                                                                                                                                                                      22.5% of A llston's
                                                                                                                                                                      energy dem and w ill
                                10,000                                                                                                                                be provided by
                                                                                                                                                                      renew able, G H G -
                                                                                         S ustainable D evelopm ent                                                   neutral sources
                                 5,000

                                                                                                                                                                      50% of rem aining
                                                                                                                                                                      em issions w ill be
                                     0
                                                                                                                                                                      offset
                                         05

                                               06

                                                     07

                                                           08

                                                                 09

                                                                       10

                                                                             11

                                                                                   12

                                                                                         13

                                                                                               14

                                                                                                     15

                                                                                                           16

                                                                                                                 17

                                                                                                                       18

                                                                                                                             19

                                                                                                                                   20

                                                                                                                                         21

                                                                                                                                               22

                                                                                                                                                     23

                                                                                                                                                           24

                                                                                                                                                                 25
                                     20

                                              20

                                                    20

                                                          20

                                                                20

                                                                      20

                                                                            20

                                                                                  20

                                                                                        20

                                                                                              20

                                                                                                    20

                                                                                                          20

                                                                                                                20

                                                                                                                      20

                                                                                                                            20

                                                                                                                                  20

                                                                                                                                        20

                                                                                                                                              20

                                                                                                                                                    20

                                                                                                                                                          20

                                                                                                                                                                20




                                                                                                     Y e ar
9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks

                                 4 components associated with new development [First Science as a prototype]:
                           100
                                 #1: Building
                           90    Design:                                Key for climate change:
                                 Buildings 40%
                           80    more efficient                      incremental reduction of CO2
                                                                                footprint
Percent of GHG Emissions




                           70

                           60    #2: Efficient
                                 energy                       #3. Renewable energy
                                 generation :                 strategies: On and off
                           50                                 site renewables: 22.5%
                                 30% less carbon
                                 intense (E.g.                of energy demand
                           40
                                 cogen)
                                                                              #4. Purchase offsets:
                           30
                                                                              Carbon offsets 50%
                                                   42%
                           20

                           10
                                                                                                   14%
                            0
                                                   2010                                            2026
                                                                              Produced by HGCI. Modified/adapted by ADG. November 2007
10. Institutionalize Continuous Improvement




   Trial             Recommend      Trial             Recommendations      Trial             Recommend      Trial             Recommendations




Evaluation      Design Process   Evaluation      Design Process         Evaluation      Design Process   Evaluation      Design Process




       Building Project                 Building Project                       Building Project                 Building Project
Harvard Campus-Wide Sustainability Principles


                           Sustainability Commitment
Harvard University is committed to continuous improvement in:
• Demonstrating institutional practices that promote sustainability.
• Promoting health, productivity and safety through building design & campus planning.
• Enhancing the health of campus ecosystems & increasing the diversity of native species.
• Developing planning tools to support triple bottom line decision-making.
• Encouraging environmental inquiry and institutional learning throughout the University.
• Establishing indicators for sustainability for monitoring & continuous improvement.


                          Implementation Commitment
• Continue Harvard Green Campus Initiative                   “As we plan for the future, these
                                                            principles will set a strong course
• Integrate into Harvard’s Capital Approvals process
                                                               that will benefit Harvard and
• Establish indicators for monitoring progress              promote responsible growth and
                                                               environmental quality in our
• Integrate into annual financial reporting processes
                                                                        community.”
                                                             President Lawrence H. Summers,
                                                                Harvard University Gazette,
                                                                     October 14 2004
To Learn More About The Harvard Green Campus Initiative:

   Contact: Leith_Sharp@harvard.edu



             Visit our website
             www.greencampus.harvard.edu




 We offer Distance learning courses through Harvard Extension School:
 ENVR –E117 Organizational Change for Sustainability.
 ENVR –E119 Green Building Design, Construction and Operations

 See:          http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre117/
               http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre119/

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Brantley.wayne
Brantley.wayneBrantley.wayne
Brantley.wayneNASAPMC
 
Heizer om10 ch05-designh good and services
Heizer om10 ch05-designh good and servicesHeizer om10 ch05-designh good and services
Heizer om10 ch05-designh good and servicesRozaimi Mohd Saad
 
Heizer om10 ch13-aggregate planning
Heizer om10 ch13-aggregate planningHeizer om10 ch13-aggregate planning
Heizer om10 ch13-aggregate planningRozaimi Mohd Saad
 
Prince2 2009-process-model
Prince2 2009-process-modelPrince2 2009-process-model
Prince2 2009-process-modelRemella Suman
 
Heizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliability
Heizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliabilityHeizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliability
Heizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliabilityRozaimi Mohd Saad
 
D1 managing in an outcome based framework
D1 managing in an outcome based frameworkD1 managing in an outcome based framework
D1 managing in an outcome based frameworkocasiconference
 
Heizer om10 ch11_s-outsourching
Heizer om10 ch11_s-outsourchingHeizer om10 ch11_s-outsourching
Heizer om10 ch11_s-outsourchingRozaimi Mohd Saad
 
Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...
Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...
Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...ITSM Academy, Inc.
 
Heizer om10 ch11-supply chain
Heizer om10 ch11-supply chainHeizer om10 ch11-supply chain
Heizer om10 ch11-supply chainRozaimi Mohd Saad
 

Tendances (20)

Heizer 17
Heizer 17Heizer 17
Heizer 17
 
Brantley.wayne
Brantley.wayneBrantley.wayne
Brantley.wayne
 
Heizer om10 ch05-designh good and services
Heizer om10 ch05-designh good and servicesHeizer om10 ch05-designh good and services
Heizer om10 ch05-designh good and services
 
Heizer om10 ch13-aggregate planning
Heizer om10 ch13-aggregate planningHeizer om10 ch13-aggregate planning
Heizer om10 ch13-aggregate planning
 
Prince2 2009-process-model
Prince2 2009-process-modelPrince2 2009-process-model
Prince2 2009-process-model
 
Heizer 01
Heizer 01Heizer 01
Heizer 01
 
Heizer om10 ch12-inventory
Heizer om10 ch12-inventoryHeizer om10 ch12-inventory
Heizer om10 ch12-inventory
 
Heizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliability
Heizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliabilityHeizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliability
Heizer om10 ch17-maintenance and reliability
 
Heizer om10 ch07_s-capacity
Heizer om10 ch07_s-capacityHeizer om10 ch07_s-capacity
Heizer om10 ch07_s-capacity
 
D1 managing in an outcome based framework
D1 managing in an outcome based frameworkD1 managing in an outcome based framework
D1 managing in an outcome based framework
 
Heizer om10 ch11_s-outsourching
Heizer om10 ch11_s-outsourchingHeizer om10 ch11_s-outsourching
Heizer om10 ch11_s-outsourching
 
Heizer 16
Heizer 16Heizer 16
Heizer 16
 
Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...
Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...
Best Practice Transfer: An approach to the organizational adoption of best pr...
 
Heizer om10 ch11-supply chain
Heizer om10 ch11-supply chainHeizer om10 ch11-supply chain
Heizer om10 ch11-supply chain
 
Heizer mod e
Heizer mod eHeizer mod e
Heizer mod e
 
Heizer mod b
Heizer mod bHeizer mod b
Heizer mod b
 
Heizer mod a
Heizer mod aHeizer mod a
Heizer mod a
 
Company Profile BPC
Company Profile BPCCompany Profile BPC
Company Profile BPC
 
Heizer 03
Heizer 03Heizer 03
Heizer 03
 
Heizer supp 06
Heizer supp 06Heizer supp 06
Heizer supp 06
 

Similaire à Triumvirate Environmental RISE meeting

The Student Dashboard V3
The Student Dashboard V3The Student Dashboard V3
The Student Dashboard V3Karl Schwartz
 
NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...
NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...
NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...NCCET
 
2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issues
2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issues2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issues
2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issuesAmber Joan Wood
 
Earned value in five easy pieces
Earned value in five easy piecesEarned value in five easy pieces
Earned value in five easy piecesGlen Alleman
 
Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...
Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...
Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...TECAD - Soluções Integradas de Projecto
 
Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...
Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...
Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...Project Controls Expo
 
Hercules C Project Overview
Hercules C Project OverviewHercules C Project Overview
Hercules C Project Overviewnkyrt
 
EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability
EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability
EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability EMAP Project
 
Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...
Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...
Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...Institut Lean France
 
Successful Outage Management Lessons Learned From Global Generation Leaders
Successful Outage Management   Lessons Learned From Global Generation LeadersSuccessful Outage Management   Lessons Learned From Global Generation Leaders
Successful Outage Management Lessons Learned From Global Generation LeadersTedLemmers
 
Change Management
Change ManagementChange Management
Change Managementpromoking
 
Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011
Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011
Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011Pulse Energy
 
Romeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchellRomeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchellNASAPMC
 
Romeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchellRomeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchellNASAPMC
 
Considerations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT Investment
Considerations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT InvestmentConsiderations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT Investment
Considerations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT InvestmentHelene Heller, PMP
 
State of the Kitchen 2012
State of the Kitchen 2012State of the Kitchen 2012
State of the Kitchen 2012Paul Day
 
DWire OCCo Presentation Handout
DWire OCCo Presentation HandoutDWire OCCo Presentation Handout
DWire OCCo Presentation Handoutkimberlee
 

Similaire à Triumvirate Environmental RISE meeting (20)

The Student Dashboard V3
The Student Dashboard V3The Student Dashboard V3
The Student Dashboard V3
 
NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...
NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...
NCCET December Webinar - Restructuring Continuing Education and Corporate Tra...
 
2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issues
2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issues2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issues
2011 06-21 green365 nahbrc - hph reoccuring issues
 
Earned value in five easy pieces
Earned value in five easy piecesEarned value in five easy pieces
Earned value in five easy pieces
 
Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...
Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...
Acção: Construção 2011 - Apresentação 05 - KANBIM PT: Sinergias BIM - Lean em...
 
Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...
Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...
Project Controls Expo - 31st Oct 2012 - The Practical use of Earned Value for...
 
Hercules C Project Overview
Hercules C Project OverviewHercules C Project Overview
Hercules C Project Overview
 
EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability
EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability
EMJD: Programme management, quality assurance and sustainability
 
Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...
Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...
Recipe for a Lean IT Service by Tata Consultancy Services - European Lean IT ...
 
Change Champions #7
Change Champions #7Change Champions #7
Change Champions #7
 
Successful Outage Management Lessons Learned From Global Generation Leaders
Successful Outage Management   Lessons Learned From Global Generation LeadersSuccessful Outage Management   Lessons Learned From Global Generation Leaders
Successful Outage Management Lessons Learned From Global Generation Leaders
 
Change Management
Change ManagementChange Management
Change Management
 
Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011
Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011
Pulse webinar: Energy Managers, Carve out Your Niche, June 2011
 
Romeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchellRomeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchell
 
Romeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchellRomeo.mitchell
Romeo.mitchell
 
57086 02 starting_upa_project
57086 02 starting_upa_project57086 02 starting_upa_project
57086 02 starting_upa_project
 
Considerations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT Investment
Considerations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT InvestmentConsiderations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT Investment
Considerations in Selecting and Protecting Your IT Investment
 
State of the Kitchen 2012
State of the Kitchen 2012State of the Kitchen 2012
State of the Kitchen 2012
 
DWire OCCo Presentation Handout
DWire OCCo Presentation HandoutDWire OCCo Presentation Handout
DWire OCCo Presentation Handout
 
JKUAT Nakuru
JKUAT NakuruJKUAT Nakuru
JKUAT Nakuru
 

Plus de Mark Campanale

Regulatory Update - STORMWATER
Regulatory Update - STORMWATERRegulatory Update - STORMWATER
Regulatory Update - STORMWATERMark Campanale
 
Regulatory Updates and Initiatives
Regulatory Updates and InitiativesRegulatory Updates and Initiatives
Regulatory Updates and InitiativesMark Campanale
 
Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...
Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...
Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...Mark Campanale
 
Preparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for Industrial
Preparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for IndustrialPreparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for Industrial
Preparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for IndustrialMark Campanale
 
The Ultimate Customer Experience
The Ultimate Customer ExperienceThe Ultimate Customer Experience
The Ultimate Customer ExperienceMark Campanale
 
Building a Compliance Regulatory Registry
Building a Compliance Regulatory RegistryBuilding a Compliance Regulatory Registry
Building a Compliance Regulatory RegistryMark Campanale
 
Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08
Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08
Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08Mark Campanale
 
Control of Pharmaceuticals at DHMC
Control of Pharmaceuticals at DHMCControl of Pharmaceuticals at DHMC
Control of Pharmaceuticals at DHMCMark Campanale
 
Update on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care Industry
Update on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care IndustryUpdate on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care Industry
Update on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care IndustryMark Campanale
 
There’s What in My Water?? Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...
There’s What in My Water??Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...There’s What in My Water??Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...
There’s What in My Water?? Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...Mark Campanale
 
The Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPs
The Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPsThe Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPs
The Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPsMark Campanale
 
Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1
Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1
Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1Mark Campanale
 
Triumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC Planning
Triumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC PlanningTriumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC Planning
Triumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC PlanningMark Campanale
 
Conversational Training
Conversational TrainingConversational Training
Conversational TrainingMark Campanale
 

Plus de Mark Campanale (15)

Regulatory Update - STORMWATER
Regulatory Update - STORMWATERRegulatory Update - STORMWATER
Regulatory Update - STORMWATER
 
Regulatory Updates and Initiatives
Regulatory Updates and InitiativesRegulatory Updates and Initiatives
Regulatory Updates and Initiatives
 
Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...
Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...
Rcra Compliance And Hazardous Waste Management In A Tough Economy Roundtable ...
 
Preparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for Industrial
Preparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for IndustrialPreparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for Industrial
Preparing for Compliance with MassDEP Mercury Prohibition for Industrial
 
The Ultimate Customer Experience
The Ultimate Customer ExperienceThe Ultimate Customer Experience
The Ultimate Customer Experience
 
Project Mgt Training
Project Mgt TrainingProject Mgt Training
Project Mgt Training
 
Building a Compliance Regulatory Registry
Building a Compliance Regulatory RegistryBuilding a Compliance Regulatory Registry
Building a Compliance Regulatory Registry
 
Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08
Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08
Holy Cross Environmental System 12 08
 
Control of Pharmaceuticals at DHMC
Control of Pharmaceuticals at DHMCControl of Pharmaceuticals at DHMC
Control of Pharmaceuticals at DHMC
 
Update on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care Industry
Update on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care IndustryUpdate on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care Industry
Update on EPA’s Study of Unused Pharmaceuticals from the Health Care Industry
 
There’s What in My Water?? Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...
There’s What in My Water??Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...There’s What in My Water??Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...
There’s What in My Water?? Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Endocrine Disrupter...
 
The Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPs
The Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPsThe Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPs
The Opportunities for Minimizing the Environmental Load of PPCPs
 
Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1
Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1
Triumvirate Enviromental's Presentation on FAME and Social Media Part 1
 
Triumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC Planning
Triumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC PlanningTriumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC Planning
Triumvirate Environmental OIL SPCC Planning
 
Conversational Training
Conversational TrainingConversational Training
Conversational Training
 

Dernier

Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationMJDuyan
 
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptxCAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptxSaurabhParmar42
 
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxM-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxDr. Santhosh Kumar. N
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepobaje godwin sunday
 
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptxIn - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptxAditiChauhan701637
 
The Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice documentThe Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice documentXsasf Sfdfasd
 
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxPractical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxKatherine Villaluna
 
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17Celine George
 
DUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRA
DUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRADUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRA
DUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRATanmoy Mishra
 
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.EnglishCEIPdeSigeiro
 
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxEducation and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxraviapr7
 
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesHow to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesCeline George
 
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdfHED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdfMohonDas
 
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICEQuality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICESayali Powar
 
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptxPrescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptxraviapr7
 
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.raviapr7
 
Philosophy of Education and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education  and Educational PhilosophyPhilosophy of Education  and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education and Educational PhilosophyShuvankar Madhu
 
What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?
What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?
What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?TechSoup
 
AUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptxAUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptxiammrhaywood
 

Dernier (20)

Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
 
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptxCAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
 
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxM-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and step
 
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptxIn - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
 
The Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice documentThe Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice document
 
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxPractical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
 
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
 
DUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRA
DUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRADUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRA
DUST OF SNOW_BY ROBERT FROST_EDITED BY_ TANMOY MISHRA
 
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
Easter in the USA presentation by Chloe.
 
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxEducation and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
 
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesHow to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
 
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdfHED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
 
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICEQuality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
 
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptxPrescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
 
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quizPrelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
 
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
 
Philosophy of Education and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education  and Educational PhilosophyPhilosophy of Education  and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education and Educational Philosophy
 
What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?
What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?
What is the Future of QuickBooks DeskTop?
 
AUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptxAUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptx
AUDIENCE THEORY -- FANDOM -- JENKINS.pptx
 

Triumvirate Environmental RISE meeting

  • 1. Transforming Our Institutions: The Harvard Green Campus Initiative Case Study Leith Sharp, Leith_sharp@harvard.edu October 2008
  • 3. Harvard’s Management Structure • Highly decentralized • Schools financially autonomous • Strong individual identities & cultures of Schools Corporation President and Provost Vice Presidents Deans Central Adminsitration Schools
  • 5. Harvard University Students • 19,000 Degree Students • 13,000 Fellows, non-degree & summer students Faculty • 2400 Faculty (on campus) • 9000 Faculty (teaching hospitals) Staff • 12,000 Administrative Staff
  • 7. Complexity in Infrastructure Lab/studio Library Assembly & 17% 8% Museum 6% Support 5% Commercial 5% Other Office & 15% Athletic Classroom 4% 24% Health care 0.4% Residential 31%
  • 8. Unknown Complexity in Decision Making Simple Lighting Retrofit Project • Location: student residence (~300 students) • Proposed savings: • Annual savings >$20,000 • Payback <3 yrs Process…
  • 9. Unknown Complexity in Decision Making Simple Lighting Retrofit Project
  • 10. Unknown Complexity in Decision Making Simple Lighting Retrofit Project School HGCI Fin Mgr (capital budget) Loan Fund Fin Mgr (operating budget) 1 2 Change Facility Director Agent Building Manager (Superintendent) House Master Vendor Univ. Ops House occupants (students) Sales Rep REP coordinator (student) Technician Maintenanc e crew
  • 11. Unknown Complexity in Decision Making Simple Lighting Retrofit Project School HGCI 4 Fin Mgr (capital budget) Loan Fund Fin Mgr (operating budget) 1 2 Change Facility Director Agent Building Manager (Superintendent) House Master Vendor 3 Univ. Ops House occupants (students) Sales Rep REP coordinator (student) Technician Maintenanc e crew
  • 12. Unknown Complexity in Decision Making Simple Lighting Retrofit Project School HGCI 4 Fin Mgr (capital budget) Loan Fund Fin Mgr (operating budget) 1 2 Change Facility Director 5 6 Building Manager (Superintendent) Agent House Master Vendor 3 Univ. Ops House occupants (students) Sales Rep REP coordinator (student) Technician Maintenanc e crew
  • 13. Unknown Complexity in Decision Making Simple Lighting Retrofit Project • Full Process = 3 months of constant facilitation by HGCI School HGCI 4 Fin Mgr (capital budget) 2 1 1 Loan Fund Fin Mgr (operating budget) 0 1 7 8 8 1 2 9 Change Facility Director 5 6 7 Agent Building Manager (Superintendent) 1 9 1 House Master 4 0 Vendor 3 1 1 1 Univ. Ops 1 House occupants (students) Sales Rep 5 2 1 3 REP coordinator (student) Technician 1 Maintenanc 6 e crew
  • 15. Harvard as Builder • 600 campus buildings • 21 million gross square feet (gsf) of floor space • Historical trends - 1 million gsf per decade
  • 16. Harvard as Landowner • 657 acres of campus land area – 219 acres in Cambridge – 22 acres in Longwood – 250 acres in Allston – 137 acres in Southborough – 29 acres in Watertown • 4,100 acres of research land area
  • 18. Harvard’s GHG Inventory: Annual Reporting 60+% growth in GHG emissions since 1992 Wide range in School GHG growth trends FY06: Cambridge/Allston campus = 74% Longwood Campus = 26% Buildings account for over 87% of emissions (to power, heat & cool) Three of Harvard’s 11 Schools account for 66% of campus emissions
  • 20. Funding Models: Entrepreneurial Business Approach Total Full Time Staff FY01 1 FY02 4 FY03 8 FY04 11 FY05 11 FY06 16 FY07 19 FY08-FY09 24+
  • 21. Funding Models: Entrepreneurial Business Approach Base Program Total Annual Funding Full Time Staff University Savings FY01 $ 80,000 1 FY02 $264,000 4 $400,000 FY03 $648,000 8 $700,000 FY04 $890,000 11 $1.5 million FY05 $857,000 11 $3 million FY06 $1,155,000 16 $5 million FY07 $1,700,000 19 $6+million FY08-FY09 $2,200,000 24+ $7+million
  • 22. Funding Models: Entrepreneurial Business Approach Green Campus Loan Fund: $12 million interest-free capital for conservation projects Existing New Construction Buildings 5 year payback 10 year payback maximum maximum Lifecycle costing used Simple payback used $8.5+ million lent since 2001 200+ projects 30% average return on investment
  • 23. Capacities: Time, Attention and Expertise Harvard Green Campus Initiative: Organizational Chart 2000 Co-Chair Faculty, Harvard School of Public Health Prof. Jack Spengler Director, Leith Sharp Co-Chair Assoc. VP, Facilities & Environmental Services Tom Vautin a
  • 24. Capacities: Time, Attention and Expertise Harvard Green Campus Initiative: Organizational Chart 2000 Green Building Operations Green Building Design Co-Chair Faculty, Harvard School of Campus Occupant Engagement Programs Public Health Prof. Jack Spengler Environmental Procurement Director, 23+ Full-time Staff Residential Green Living Programs Leith Sharp 20 Part-time Renewable Energy students Co-Chair Assoc. VP, Facilities & HGCI Base Program Staff Environmental Services Tom Vautin HGCI Courses at Harvard Extension School •Sustainability – The Challenge of Changing Our Institutions •Green Building Design, Construction and Operations ♦ FY07Operating Cost = $1.6million ♦ Annual Savings = $6+ million & 90+ million pounds of CO2 20% Office of President and Provost & central administration sources.
  • 25. 10 Elements of Organizational Transformation 1.Change Attitudes and Assumptions 2.Engage People and Foster New Capacities 3.Assessment, Research and Development 4.Pilot and Expand New Practices 5.Process Quality Control & Continuous Improvement 6.Leverage Leadership 7.Reform Finance and Accounting Structures 8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention 9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks
  • 26. 1. Change Attitudes and Assumptions
  • 27. Building Trust Based Relationships TRUST Three Types of Relationship Models in Organizations Transaction Authority Reference: Professor Karen Stephenson, http://www.netform.com
  • 28. 1. Change Attitudes and Assumptions The Transformation of Hearts and Minds that Underpins Effective Organizational Transformation for Sustainability at Harvard There is no problem because….the planet is an infinite source of resources with an infinite capacity to absorb our pollution There is a problem but it’s not mine because…..what I do has little impact on the planet, I just don’t count, my influence is too small There is a problem, I am involved, I probably could do something except it’s so hard……I can’t get the funds, I don’t know how, I don’t have the time, I keep forgetting, my manager doesn’t seem to want it, there’s no reliable alternative, it’s too risky, I don’t get evaluated on it etc There is a problem and I am fully engaged in working on my part of the solution in every way possible!
  • 29. 2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities Occupant impacts on building operations & environmental impacts
  • 30. 2. Engage People Motivation and Foster New Capacities MOTIVATION There is much research to support the idea that learning is best served when “motivation is intrinsic” that is to say when the individual is self-motivated rather than externally motivated. Experience that has no emotional engagement are not likely to be effective in generating new mental representations. Gardener, H. (1999) The Disciplined Mind: What All Students Should Understand. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  • 31. 2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities PEER TO PEER PROGRAMS Harvard University Dining Services: Green Skillet Competition Inter-Dining Hall Competition: 500+Dining Staff In 2007 The winning kitchen reduced electricity use by 23%
  • 32. 2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities PEER TO PEER PROGRAMS Residential Green Living Programs 9,000+ students from the College, Harvard Business School, Harvard Law School, Kennedy School of Government To reduce the environmental impact of dorm life at Harvard through… • Peer education, and awareness. Major focuses • Practical projects in the dorms. • Electricity, heating, & water • Collaboration w/ administration to efficiency identify barriers to conservation. • Reduce waste through re- use and recycling • Sustainable dining
  • 33. In the College Quantified savings are now well over $400,000/year. • >13.8%reduction in electricity use of dorms by 2007 • >4% reduction in fuel for heating • 33% reduction in food waste • 25% increase in recycling • $50,000 annual water savings • >60% reduction in move-out trash • >$75,000/year of reusable items salvaged and resold by REP and Habitat
  • 34. 2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities Targeted Behavioral Change SHUT YOUR SASH COMPETITION Harvard Medical School Faculty of Arts and Sciences HMS Fume Hood quot;Shut the Sashquot; Campaign Average Sash Height & Energy Cost per Hood $2,500 14 Avg Energy Cost / Avg Sash Height 12 $2,000 Hood / year 10 (inches) $1,500 8 6 $1,000 4 $500 2 0 $0 Over $250,000 of WAB HIM Bldg C SGM Arm energy savings from Pre-Campaign Sash Height Building Post Campaign Sash Height this targeted Baseline avg cost / hood / year Post Campaign avg cost / hood / year competition
  • 35. 2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities Large Scale Social Marketing Campaigns 2007 OnlineServices – 3 complexes (1,800 tenants) – 10 REPs Harvard Real Estate Sustainability Pledge Last year over 8,000 8 dorms (700 students) – 4 REPs Harvard Law School – people signed! Harvard Business School – 5 dorms (420-students) – 6 REPs 5,700 people pledged to turn off computers and lights at night. - 5,400 people pledged to enable sleep mode on their computer. - 3,700 people pledged to buy at least 30% recycled paper. - 4,600 people pledged to double-side copies. - 3,821 people pledged to bring their own coffee mug.
  • 36. 2. Engage People and Foster New Capacities Certoon: Annual Campus Energy Reduction Cartoon Competition in the College
  • 37. 3. Assessment, Research and Development
  • 38. 3. Assessment, Research and Development What is the Cost of LEED? Over 20 LEED Projects at Harvard show that there are 34 credits and 6 prerequisites that can be achieved at no added cost if the process is managed effectively. Included in this number are 9 credits that all Harvard projects immediately get. 45 40 40 35 30 25 20 15 11 10 10 5 3 0 Silver = 33 Point is no cost and Potential cost impact, Point has cost Point has additional cost often given in Harvard but will result in reduced implication and an impact with strictly an Gold = 39 projects operations costs associated human environment benefit health / comfort / productivity benefit Platinum=52
  • 39. Building Energy Assessments, Tracking & Reporting HGCI has identified over 200 energy conservation measures in 60 building complexes within a 12 month period for Harvard Real Estate Service. Baseline Summary Peabody Terrace Apartments Square Feet Units Occupants Build Manager Org # UOS Bldg # 450849 495 696 Pam Cornell 53830 425 Heating Source Cooling Source Utilities Included in Rent Water Billing TRUE Blackstone Steam FALSE #2 Fuel Oil FALSE Water Chilled FALSE AC Window Water and Sewer TRUE FALSE Monthly FALSE Gas Natural FALSE #4 Fuel Oil FALSE FALSE Geothermal Electricity TRUE TRUEQuarterly Chiller On-site FALSE Electricity FALSE #6 Fuel Oil TRUE Heat TRUE 1 None TRUE Annual Usage / Utility Baseline Baseline Years Usage / SF Occupant Electricity (kWh) 2,265,043 FY 2006-2007 5.024 3254.372 Natural Gas (therms) 5,044 FY 2006-2007 0.011 7.248 Steam (MMBTU) 24,956 FY 2006-2007 0.055 35.856 Water (ccf) 31,023 FY 2006-2007 0.069 44.573 Chilled Water (Ton-Days) 0 - - - #2 Fuel Oil (gallons) 0 - - - #4 Fuel Oil (barrels) 0 - - - #6 Fuel Oil (barrels) 0 - - - Combined Heating (KBTU) 24,956,034 FY 2006-2007 55.353 35856.371 Total KBTU 33,189,118 FY 2006-2007 73.615 47685.514 Electricity Heating Normalized Annual Usage and Cost kWhs Normalized Annual Usage and Cost KBTU Cost Cost 3,000,000 800,000 30,000,000 700,000 700,000 600,000 2,500,000 25,000,000 600,000 2,000,000 500,000 500,000 20,000,000 Cost ($) kWhs Cost ($) KBTUs 1,500,000 400,000 400,000 15,000,000 300,000 300,000 1,000,000 200,000 10,000,000 200,000 500,000 100,000 5,000,000 100,000 0 0 Fiscal 2006 Fiscal 2007 Fiscal 2008 Fiscal 2009 Fiscal 2010 0 0 Water Chilled Water Normalized Annual Usage and Cost Ccfs Normalized Annual Usage and Cost Ton-Days Cost Cost 35,000 300,000 1 1 30,000 1 1 250,000 1 1 25,000 200,000 1 1 Cost ($) Ton-Days Cost ($) 20,000 Ccfs 1 1 150,000 15,000 1 1 100,000 0 0 10,000 0 0 5,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fiscal 2006 Fiscal 2007 Fiscal 2008 Fiscal 2009 Fiscal 2010 0 0
  • 40. Onsite Renewable Energy Big Belly Trash Compactors Photovoltaic Ground Source Heat Pumps Collecting oil for Harvard Building Mounted Solar Thermal Recycling truck Wind
  • 41. Technology Comparison PV Wind Solar Thermal $/20 yr $.25-.35 $.03-.12 $.24 kWh $/20 yr $400-550 $100-200 $70-350 MTCDE Note: costs are AFTER rebates for PV and wind and factored over 20 years Solar thermal is not eligible for MTC rebates
  • 42. 4. Pilot and Expand New Practices
  • 43. 4. Pilot and Expand New Practices Occupancy sensor driven temperature Setbacks Biodiesel in University Shuttles Ground Source Heat Pumps Green Cleaning
  • 44. 4. Pilot and Expand New Practices Harvard University Diesel Emission Controls For Construction Equipment
  • 45. Process to Implementation • Trial, Education, Buy-In, Meetings… Harvard Transportation Services Vehicle
  • 46. Harvard Emissions Spec • Retrofits - 60HP+ onsite 20+ working days • EPAs verified list, or approved by Harvard • Ultra Low Sulfur Deisel. Preference for biodiesel, ethanol • Anti-idling, equipment location, electric equipment
  • 48. 4. Pilot and Expand New Practices Green Building at Harvard :History 2001: HGCI initiates first 3 pilot LEED projects 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 7 LEED Projects 16 LEED Projects 21 LEED Projects 26 LEED Projects 50+ LEED Projec 2 Certified 4 Certified 5 Certified 7 Certified 12 Certified 5 Registered 12 Registered 16 Registered 19 Registered 38 Registere
  • 49. Levels of LEED Ratings 52-69 points 39-51 points 33-38 points Green Buildings worldwide are certified with a voluntary, 26-32 points consensus-based rating system. USGBC has four levels of LEED. Test Source: www.usgbc.org
  • 50. Dunster / Mather Kitchen and Serveries LEED Silver Certified First Institution Kitchen to Achieve LEED, Dual-Flush Toilets, Melink Variable Speed Drive Stove Hoods, Composting System Harvard Dining Services
  • 51. Aldrich Hall LEED Silver Pending Campus Lighting Master Plan, Preferred Parking for Fuel Efficient Vehicles, Green Cleaning Program, high performance ventilation 13 Filters, 80% C&D Waste Diversion Harvard Business School
  • 52. 90 Mt. Auburn St. LEED Gold Certified Ground Source Heat Pumps, No Irrigation, Indoor Air Quality Testing Prior to Occupancy, Untreated Concrete Floors and Walls, Green Cleaning for All of HRES U&C, Photo by: Nathan Gauthier Photo by: Nathan Gauthier Harvard University Library
  • 53. First Science Center Seeking LEED Gold Highest energy performance goal of any lab design at Harvard, careful attention to materials selections, onsite stormwater re-use Allston Development
  • 54. 46 Blackstone LEED Platinum Certified Submitted to USGBC in September, 55 Points Pending – 52 Required for LEED Platinum, Highest energy performance of any Harvard LEED building, bioswale, energy efficient elevator University Operations Services
  • 55. Landmark Center, HSPH LEED Certified 42,000 Build-Out, Underfloor Air Distribution, Digitally controlled Lighting w/T-5 Lamps Harvard School of Public Health
  • 57. 5. Process Improvement Did someone leave and Do we need some momentum lost? in time research? Is there some unfounded perception of risk or Do we need more misunderstanding management support? preventing engagement? Has it fallen off the agenda Did we consider life cycle due to other priorities? costs, rebates, grants, integrated design related Is the bigger picture savings etc? still being addressed? Does anyone have the Does something have to time to project manage be done and no else this properly? knows how to do it? Are we re-inventing the Are we missing someone wheel instead of using important at the table? what’s been done already? Continuously Diagnose and Address the Weakest Links in Every Process
  • 58. Process Quality Control & Continuous Improvement 5. Process Improvement Ten Commandments for Cost Effective Green Building Construction & Renovations 1. Commitment 2. Leadership 3. Accountability 4. Process Management 5. Integrated Design 6. Energy Modeling 7. Commissioning Plus 8. Specifications 9. Life Cycle Costing 10.Continuous Improvement
  • 59. 46 Blackstone LEED Platinum Certified Submitted to USGBC in September, 55 Points Pending – 52 Required for LEED Platinum, Highest energy performance of any Harvard LEED building, bioswale, energy efficient elevator University Operations Services
  • 60. Developing Stormwater Strategies . Original site consisted of 100% impervious surfaces
  • 61. 658 tons of asphalt were removed and recycled
  • 62. Demo of exterior structures to create open space and future Bioswale
  • 63. Creating a permeable surface for the courtyard Installing high-albedo pavers on stone base
  • 64. Bioremediation system for surface water treatment
  • 65. Bioswale treats all water from 25,000 s.f. parking lot
  • 66. Storm run-off on the site is reduced by 35% to 51% Drainage to municipal sewer system eliminated.
  • 67. A serious commitment to construction waste management 99% waste diversion through reuse and recycling
  • 68. Daylight and Views •Daylight access to over 75% of spaces •View access to over 90% of spaces
  • 70. Energy Efficient Lighting Daylight and occupant sensing fluorescent lighting Full cut-off exterior lighting
  • 71. Plumbing 43% reduction in water use from EPAct Standards
  • 72. Thermal Insulation and Vapor Barrier Application of Icynene Foam
  • 73. Reflective Roofing and Operable Windows Window features: • Double pane, argon-filled low-e glass • U value .25 Roof Specifications: • Solar reflectance 65% • Emittance .92 • U values .024 to .032
  • 74. HVAC Design Strategy • Right-size the design: – capacities to match building envelope thermal performance • Minimize energy use in delivery systems – Air handler for ventilation only (100% fresh air) – Energy recovery from exhaust air (enthalpy wheel) – Fan-less valence units for space heating and cooling – Variable frequency drives on all pumps
  • 75. Energy Use Designed to be 40+ % more energy efficient than ASHRAE 90.1
  • 76. Mechanical Systems • Cooling: ground-source heat pumps • Heating: hot water from steam • DDC controls: – Outside air reset – Occupancy sensors – CO2 monitors – Variable air volume
  • 77. Air Handler/Heat Recovery System • Provides up to 5100 CFM of 100% outside air for ventilation • Enthaply energy recovery system is 80% efficient • Ventilation is demand controlled with occupancy and CO2 sensors
  • 78. Sustainable and Renewable Materials Concrete Counters Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certified Wood
  • 79. Sustainable Carpeting Materials Recycled, recyclable, PVC-free, low VOC carpet tiles Bamboo flooring Low VOC adhesives and sealants
  • 80. Reused Systems Furniture Refurbished furniture with recycled materials
  • 83. TRADITION DESIGN PROCESS A typical process involves a linear progression from the architect down to the engineers and finally the contractors. A strict hierarchy of communication is enforced by the project manager. Architects www.aangepastbouwen.nl Engineers www.hansa-klima.de Contractors
  • 84. Integrated Design An Integrated Design Process is a more iterative process that provides additional flexibility and dynamism in the engagement of all team members so that there is scope for ongoing learning and the capacity to address emergent features and strategies. The project team is still required to adhere to clear communication protocols to minimize conflict and confusion, however there are more deliberate opportunities for cross communication between team members. The design charrette is a key forum for integrated design. Architects Engineers Source: Leith Sharp 2008 Contractors
  • 85. Integrated Design Requires Inclusiveness and Collaboration Conventional Design Process Integrated Design Process Involves team members only when essential Inclusive from the outset Less time, energy, and collaboration exhibited Front-loaded — time and energy invested early in early stages More decisions made by fewer people Decisions influenced by broad team Linear process Iterative process Systems often considered in isolation Whole-systems thinking Limited to constrained optimization Allows for full optimization Diminished opportunity for synergies Seeks synergies Emphasis on up-front costs Life-cycle costing Typically finished when construction is Process continues through post-occupancy complete Source: ‘Roadmap for the Integrated Design Process’. Prepared Busby Perkins+Will, Stantec Consulting
  • 86. The Integrated Design Process is as Much a Mindset as it is a Process
  • 87. The Integrated Design Process is as Much a Mindset as it is a Process Mindset Principle Strategies Inclusion & collaboration Broad collaborative team • Careful team formation Outcome oriented Well-defined scope, • Team building vision, goals & objectives Trust & transparency Effective & open communication • Facilitation training for team • Expert facilitation Open-mindedness & Innovation and synthesis • Visioning charrettes (with creativity comprehensive preparation) • Brainstorming Rigor & attention to detail Systematic decision-making • Goals and targets matrix • Decision-making tools Continuous learning • Iterative process with feedback • Post-occupancy evaluation and improvement cycles • Comprehensive commissioning Source: ‘Roadmap for the Integrated Design Process’. Prepared Busby Perkins+Will, Stantec Consulting
  • 88. The Management Challenge of Integrated Design The integrated design process requires skillful management. A number of integrated design process management recommendations include: Ask for it up front, include it in the RFPs, Owners Project Requirements etc Select design team members with experience in integrated design where possible. Include design team members at the right time, such as operational representatives, commissioning agent, sustainability consultant, cost estimator, controls engineer etc Engage the team in a process of internalizing all sustainability and project goals. Establish an early dynamic of trust and mutual understanding across the team as the foundation of effective collaboration. Undertake a design charrette with full team participation to develop strategies and allocate roles and responsibilities Carefully and consistently diagnose when to bring the team together, when to drive them to collaborate and when to implement linear task sequence management. Continuously ask why particular strategies are being recommended and what other options have been considered Implement modeling strategies & life cycle costing to evaluate impacts of design options Ensure the effective engagement of operations staff, the commissioning agent to ensure the design meets operational needs
  • 89. 6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions
  • 90. 6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions Grass Roots CONFIDENCE & CAPACITY Students, building Managers, •Evidence facilities staff, project managers, •Confidence custodial, transport & procurement staff •Business base for green campus organization Top Level Leadership AUTHORITY President, Provost, Deans, •Legitimacy VP’s •Priority •Mood/culture •Goals Upper Middle Management SYSTEMS INTEGRATION 2nd Level Deans, Associate VP’s, •Capital Approvals Systems CFOs, COO - Planning •Finance & Accounting •University Contracts
  • 91. 6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions Leverage Leadership Harvard-Wide Green Building Guidelines: Development Process Development and Approval Process • 2001-4: LEED piloted and numerous projects underway • 2004: President Summers: Approves Sustainability Principles including a commitment to integrate sustainability into capital approvals process. • 2004-7: LEED project experience expanded across the University • Feb 2007: University Construction Managers Council asked HGCI to establish interfaculty sub-committee to draft guidelines • March – Oct: Guidelines developed by HGCI and interfaculty committee over 11 meetings
  • 92. 6. Leverage Different Leadership Contributions Leverage Leadership Harvard-Wide Green Building Guidelines: Development Process Development and Approval Process: Oct-Dec 2007 • Financial Deans: Approval • Capital Projects Review Committee: Approval • University Construction Managers Council: Approval • Administrative Deans: Approval • University Construction Managers Council : Approve final draft • President Faust: Notified of completion and adoption Ongoing Efforts: • Green Building Guidelines Committee: Tasked to review LEED Gold option through 2008 • Harvard Green Campus Initiative: Tasked to integrate guidelines into University contracts & standards, provide training and project support to all Schools and Departments
  • 93. 7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures
  • 94. Accounting Structures Are Getting in the Way of Best Financial Practice Barrier: Accounting structures are driving Capital Budget inefficient design and Maintenance Budget Managers operations by limiting Managers the appropriate movement of investments and savings Utility Budget Human Resources Managers Managers
  • 95. 7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures Green Campus Loan Fund $12 Million Fund - interest free capital for high performance projects Existing Buildings New Construction 5 Year Payback Maximum 10 Year payback maximum Full project funded Cost premium of high Can bundle projects performance option funded Simple payback used Life Cycle Costing used
  • 96. 7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures Green Campus Loan Fund $12 Million Fund - interest free capital for high performance projects Existing Buildings New Construction $12 million interest-free capital for conservation projects +$8.5 million lent since 2001 ~200 projects 30% average return on investment
  • 97. 7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures Provide Financial Access to the Champions
  • 98. 7. Reform Finance and Accounting Structures HARVARD Green Building Guidelines • Capital projects exceeding $5 million will seek minimum LEED Silver certification. • Harvard University requires a number of LEED credits to be treated as pre-requisites (including minimum 6 energy credits ~2030 Challenge) • An “Integrated Design” approach is to be adopted. • Life Cycle Costing assessment is to be conducted throughout the project • Energy modeling is required • Adopt an ongoing commissioning approach for the life of the building.
  • 99. Life Cycle Costing A method of project evaluation in which all costs arising from owning, operating, maintaining and ultimately disposing of a project over an agreed period are accounted for and converted into today’s dollars. In short, life cycle costing allows for the consideration of medium and long term cost implications of today’s decisions. When can it be used? ► New Construction ► Major Renovations ► Capital Projects ► Routine Replacements or Upgrades ► Day to day purchases that incur any ongoing costs
  • 100. When Should We Introduce the LCC Approach in the Building Design Process? Get in Early and Get in Ugly! ( Favourite quote from GRT!)
  • 101. Simplest Use of Life Cycle Costing Present Value of the Present Value of Investment Costs + Operational Costs Present Value = All costs in today’s $ Provided by Bob Charette
  • 102. How Should LCC Be Used in the Decision Making Process? 1. To compare different options (e.g. ground source heat pumps versus natural gas furnace) 2. To determine financially optimal efficiency level (e.g. amount of insulation) 3. To identify medium and long term savings for potential reinvestment or immediate justification of integrated design solutions
  • 103. 1. To compare different options (e.g. ground source heat pumps versus natural gas furnace)
  • 104. Vacuum Pump Replacement Study Escalation Discount Rate 8.00% Rate 3.50% Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Name Water Seal Dry Claw Description Existing Replacement Annual Utility Cost $ 38,768.20 $ 15,030.41 Annual Maintenance Cost $ 440.00 $ 190.00 First Cost $ - $ 46,500.00 Year 10 Replacement $ 47,340.00 $ 61,147.50 Year 20 Replacement $ 59,940.00 $ 77,422.50 Years 20 20 Total Net Present Value $ 808,819.73 $ 457,403.89 Savings $ 351,415.84
  • 105. Life Cycle Cost Analysis Scenario 6: >Break Even Annual Costs (5.58 MMBTU/week) >Malkin Perspective General Assumptions Maintenance Escalation 3.50% Discount Rate 5.75% Gas Boilers Central Steam (oil/gas) FY2007 Rates $3,725 FY07 Maintenance Cost $0 Annual Gas Usage Gas (per therm) $1.55 3,946 0 (therms) Steam (per MMBTU) Annual Steam Usage [includes fuel, non-fuel, $29.00 0 339 (MMBtu) and distribution] $9,841 FY2007 Annual $9,841 Maintenance Gas Repair Net Annual Present Value Present Value Net Annual Repair Steam Maintenance Cost Cost Cost Cost Annual Costs Year Annual Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost $3,855 $6,116 $9,972 $9,429 FY 2008 1 $9,694 $10,252 $10,252 $0 $3,990 $6,353 $10,343 $9,249 FY 2009 2 $9,629 $10,768 $10,768 $0 $4,130 $6,550 $10,680 $9,031 FY 2010 3 $9,564 $11,311 $11,311 $0 $4,275 $6,787 $11,062 $8,845 FY 2011 4 $9,497 $11,877 $11,877 $0 $4,424 $7,024 $11,448 $8,656 FY 2012 5 $9,435 $12,478 $12,478 $0 $4,579 $7,270 $11,849 $8,472 FY 2013 6 $9,234 $12,915 $12,915 $0 $4,739 $7,524 $12,263 $8,292 FY 2014 7 $9,038 $13,367 $13,367 $0 $4,905 $7,787 $12,693 $8,115 FY 2015 8 $8,846 $13,835 $13,835 $0 $5,077 $8,060 $13,137 $7,943 FY 2016 9 $8,657 $14,319 $14,319 $0 $5,254 $8,342 $7,053 $20,650 $11,806 FY 2017 10 $8,876 $15,525 $705 $14,820 $0 $5,438 $8,634 $14,072 $7,608 FY 2018 11 $8,293 $15,339 $15,339 $0 $5,629 $8,936 $14,565 $7,446 FY 2019 12 $8,116 $15,876 $15,876 $0 $5,826 $9,249 $15,075 $7,288 FY 2020 13 $7,944 $16,431 $16,431 $0 $6,030 $9,573 $15,602 $7,133 FY 2021 14 $7,775 $17,006 $17,006 $0 $6,241 $9,908 $16,148 $6,981 FY 2022 15 $7,609 $17,602 $17,602 $0 $6,459 $10,255 $16,714 $6,833 FY 2023 16 $7,447 $18,218 $18,218 $0 $6,685 $10,613 $17,299 $6,687 FY 2024 17 $7,289 $18,855 $18,855 $0 $6,919 $10,985 $17,904 $6,545 FY 2025 18 $7,134 $19,515 $19,515 $0 $7,161 $11,369 $18,531 $6,406 FY 2026 19 $6,982 $20,198 $20,198 $0 $7,412 $11,767 $9,994 $29,173 $9,536 FY 2027 20 $7,159 $21,900 $995 $20,905 $0 20 Year Net $162,302 $168,219 Present Cost
  • 106. 2. To determine financially optimal efficiency level (e.g. amount of insulation)
  • 107. How Much Insulation? Inches 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Upfront Cost $45 $50 $55 $60 $65 $70 $75 $80 $85 $90 $95 $100 Energy Use 4 3.2 2.56 2.05 1.64 1.31 1.05 0.84 0.67 0.54 0.43 0.34
  • 108. How Much Insulation? Energy Cash Year Per Energy 20 Insulation 20 Year Years 0 Inches -$63.43 5 100.00 1 Inches -$36.77 4.00 80.00 2 Inches -$16.14 3.20 64.00 3 Inches -$0.73 2.56 51.20 4 Inches $9.03 2.05 40.96 5 Inches $13.64 1.64 32.77 6 Inches $14.12 1.31 26.21 7 Inches $11.30 1.05 20.97 Using an integrated design 8 Inches $5.83 0.84 16.78 approach you 9 Inches -$1.73 0.67 13.42 may be able 10 Inches -$8.66 0.54 10.74 eliminate mechanical 11 Inches -$12.57 0.43 8.59 equipment to justify this cost
  • 109. 3. To identify medium and long term savings for potential reinvestment or immediate justification of integrated design solutions
  • 110. A Financial Model for Climate Neutrality
  • 111. YALE: Campus GHG Reduction Framework: Progress to Date A nnual C am pus Em issions Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent 5 Y 0 0 OR E -2 C T PR AJ E TR C O N S E R VA TIO N YA L E A N N O U N C EM EN T RE R E N EW A B LE DU E N ER G Y CT IO N PA TH IF P R O G R E SS TO D AT E LI NE C A R BO N O FFS ET • 8 % r educ tion f rom 04 p eak AR P R O JEC TS • 1 3 % below Pre -2005 Tra jecto ry G O AL •1. 5% C am p us G S F Incre ase sinc e ‘05 Ivy Plus Sustainability Meeting 2008 Campus GHG Report
  • 112. CORNELL: GHG Reduction Plan and Strategies 400 Emissions without Energy Initiatives & 350 CHPP (2000-2012) GHG Emissions (metric kilo-tons) Status Quo 300 Kyoto Target by 2012 Green Development 250 Energy Conservation 200 Actuals 150 Fuel Mix 100 Projected 2007-2012 with CCHPP in 2010 50 Renewable Energy / Offsets 0 2000 2005 2010 2015 Future: 2025 2030 2035 2020 Climate Neutral 2040 Year Ivy Plus Sustainability Meeting 2008 Campus GHG Report
  • 113. Accounting Reform for Building Climate Neutrality Adopting 20 years net present value accounting framework for evaluating carbon neutrality investment and return options for each building. Track and reinvest savings from energy demand reductions to fund onsite renewable energy, fuel switching, additional efficiency efforts and carbon offsets.
  • 114. Costing Case Study Building Name Leverett Towers F & G Department Faculty of Arts and Sciences Description Complex of 2 11-story towers Age Built 1959; renovations every 4 years Size 121,697 square feet Occupancy 158 suites, 20 tutor apartments; 300 residents Demographics Undergraduates, graduate tutors Lease format Academic year appointments; temporary summer housing Building systems and Heat/ventilation: Steam to forced air and radiant heat; utilities Hot water: steam Air conditioning: window units Electricity: tutor kitchenette appliances Natural gas: dryers (1990-2001 only) 2006 GHG emissions 1537 MTCDE 114
  • 115. Costing Case Study (Research provided by Debra Shepard 2008) Leverett Towers Investment Summary % of Investment Period MTCDE/yr Component Portfolio Energy Conservation Measures Renewable Energy Technology 17% 2007-2009 255 (onsite) 3% 2007-2009 49 Fuel Switch 22% 2012-2020 345 Offsets 58% 2012-2020 888 Behavior Program ((2%)) 2007-2020 ((33))
  • 116. Costing Case Study (Research provided by Debra Shepard 2008) Leverett Towers Investment Summary % of Investment Period MTCDE/yr Component Portfolio Energy Conservation Measures Renewable Energy Technology 17% 2007-2009 255 (onsite) 3% 2007-2009 49 Fuel Switch 22% 2012-2020 345 Offsets 58% 2012-2020 888 Behavior Program ((2%)) 2007-2020 ((33)) erette Towers Financial Summary for Climate Neutrality Leverett Tow ers: Net present value Climate Neutral Portfolio at 2020 Financial Category through 2020 17% Investments (ECM, RET, Fuel Switch, Behavior) ($1,068,958) 3% ECMs RETs Savings (ECM, RET, and Behavior) $1,142,947 58% Fuel Sw itch 22% Offsets Carbon Offset Purchases ($68,268) TOTAL PROGRAM Net Present Value $5,721 116
  • 117. Designing Programs for the Way We Are 8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention by Institutionalizing New Practices
  • 118. Designing Programs for the Way We Are 8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention by Institutionalizing New Practices Conscious Engagement The findings of many studies suggest that the conscious self “plays a causal role only 5% of the time” There is an active effort on behalf of the mind to make what is conscious unconscious as quickly as possible. While conscious choice and guidance are needed to perform new tasks, after some repetition, conscious choice quickly drops out and unconscious habit takes over, freeing up precious reserves of conscious awareness. Bargh, J. A. and Chartrand, T.L. (1999) The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psycologist, 54 (7) 462-479
  • 119. Designing Programs for the Way We Are 8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention by Institutionalizing New Practices Conscious Engagement The findings of many studies suggest that the conscious self “plays a causal role only 5% of the time” There is an active effort on behalf of the mind to make what is conscious unconscious as quickly as possible. While conscious choice and guidance are needed to perform new tasks, after some repetition, conscious choice quickly drops out and unconscious habit takes over, freeing up precious reserves of conscious awareness. Bargh, J. A. and Chartrand, T.L. (1999) The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psycologist, 54 (7) 462-479 Implications for Creating a Learning Organization •Make it a habit ASAP •Institutionalize using organizational systems ASAP 5% Conscious Behavior
  • 120. 8. Remove the Need for Conscious Attention Designing Programs for the Way We Are by Institutionalizing New Practices EXAMPLES: •Adopt new financial approval requirements •Integrate new practices into contracts and specifications ASAP •Redefine position descriptions, performance reviews & training programs •Implement prompts & visible cues to trigger behavior (signs, bins, emails) •Formalize new annual reporting requirements •Establish routines of regular meetings and agenda items
  • 121. 9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks
  • 122. 9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks Cambridge vs Longwood Emissions 247,224 250,000 233,663 220,407 219,104 204,449 200,000 145,572 150,000 MTCDE Cambridge Longwood 110,995 114,054 100,000 85,914 Life Cycle Costing 63,293 52,930 48,723 50,000 0 Finance and Accounting Frameworks FY90 FY02 FY04 FY04 FY05 FY06 GHG Reduction Targets Green Building Standards
  • 123. Summary of Ivy GHG Commitments in 2008 Brown University 42% below 2007 baseline by 2020 Columbia University 30% below 2005 levels by 2017 [in line with PlaNYC] Cornell University Signed Presidents Climate Commitment. Will have strategic plan including timetable in 2009 (already have 7% below 1990) Harvard University 30% below 2006 by 2016 including all growth (which equates to a net 50% reduction) University of Pennsylvania Signed Presidents Climate Commitment. Will have strategic plan including timetable Sept 2009 Princeton University 1990 levels by 2020 (18% reduction from 2007) Yale University 43% reduction from 2005 (10% below 1990) by 2020 Ivy Plus Sustainability Meeting 2008 Campus GHG Report
  • 124. 9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy The Allston Sustainability Guidelines chart a course for Harvard to reduce the emissions of its new campus in Allston by over 80% compared to a conventional campus. A llston E m issions R eduction S trategy B uildings w ill use 30,000 40% less energy C onventional D evelopm ent than stipulated by 25,000 A S H R A E 90.1 Allston Emissions (MTCE) E nergy generation 20,000 w ill be 30% m ore efficient than current H arvard standards 15,000 22.5% of A llston's energy dem and w ill 10,000 be provided by renew able, G H G - S ustainable D evelopm ent neutral sources 5,000 50% of rem aining em issions w ill be 0 offset 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Y e ar
  • 125. 9. Adopt Accountability Frameworks 4 components associated with new development [First Science as a prototype]: 100 #1: Building 90 Design: Key for climate change: Buildings 40% 80 more efficient incremental reduction of CO2 footprint Percent of GHG Emissions 70 60 #2: Efficient energy #3. Renewable energy generation : strategies: On and off 50 site renewables: 22.5% 30% less carbon intense (E.g. of energy demand 40 cogen) #4. Purchase offsets: 30 Carbon offsets 50% 42% 20 10 14% 0 2010 2026 Produced by HGCI. Modified/adapted by ADG. November 2007
  • 126. 10. Institutionalize Continuous Improvement Trial Recommend Trial Recommendations Trial Recommend Trial Recommendations Evaluation Design Process Evaluation Design Process Evaluation Design Process Evaluation Design Process Building Project Building Project Building Project Building Project
  • 127. Harvard Campus-Wide Sustainability Principles Sustainability Commitment Harvard University is committed to continuous improvement in: • Demonstrating institutional practices that promote sustainability. • Promoting health, productivity and safety through building design & campus planning. • Enhancing the health of campus ecosystems & increasing the diversity of native species. • Developing planning tools to support triple bottom line decision-making. • Encouraging environmental inquiry and institutional learning throughout the University. • Establishing indicators for sustainability for monitoring & continuous improvement. Implementation Commitment • Continue Harvard Green Campus Initiative “As we plan for the future, these principles will set a strong course • Integrate into Harvard’s Capital Approvals process that will benefit Harvard and • Establish indicators for monitoring progress promote responsible growth and environmental quality in our • Integrate into annual financial reporting processes community.” President Lawrence H. Summers, Harvard University Gazette, October 14 2004
  • 128. To Learn More About The Harvard Green Campus Initiative: Contact: Leith_Sharp@harvard.edu Visit our website www.greencampus.harvard.edu We offer Distance learning courses through Harvard Extension School: ENVR –E117 Organizational Change for Sustainability. ENVR –E119 Green Building Design, Construction and Operations See: http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre117/ http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre119/