Spring 2002, Volume 20, Number 2 The Move towards Green Schools With an estimated one third of US schools needing replacement or extensive repair, chances are good that there is a school construction or renovation project on the table–or in the works–in your community. As school decision makers determine how best to invest in the future, many are looking toward high-performance "green" schools. The term "high-performance" describes the actual school facility. You may recall spending time in a building whose lack of air circulation made you feel groggy, or whose noisy heating system drowned out speakers’ voices. Although motivated students and teachers can overcome such problems and perform well despite these and other obstacles, well-designed facilities make education a more enjoyable, productive, and healthy experience. High Performance on the Bottom Line As school decision makers consider "going green," the question on the top of their minds is, of course, the cost. Cost-effectiveness is, in fact, one of the most compelling reasons for communities to choose to build high-performance schools. Because these schools are designed to be energy, water, and material efficient, they can dramatically reduce operating costs. The US Department of Energy estimates that the nation’s average school utility costs are approximately $125 per student per year, when one takes into account water, wastewater processing, and trash. The costs are likely even higher in many parts of the northeast where heating needs are great and energy is relatively expensive. A high- performance school can yield savings of up to $50 per student per year. In addition, high-performance schools are built to be durable and therefore require less maintenance. They have also been shown to lead to fewer student absences, which can mean more funding because state aid formulas are often linked to average daily attendance. Attendance reflects, at least in part, the overall health of the students. High-performance schools are exemplary models of healthy buildings, as they have superior indoor air quality and use sustainable materials that do not release hazardous chemicals. This aspect of high-performance schools is critical: according to the US Environmental Protection Agency, as many as one half of the nation’s 115,000 schools have problems related to indoor air quality. Poor indoor air quality can trigger asthma attacks, spread disease, expose occupants to toxic substances, and cause drowsiness, headaches, and dizziness. High-performance schools mitigate such problems, not only bettering student health, but also decreasing potential liability costs resulting from litigation—an important financial benefit. The Benefits of Daylight Designs for high-performance green schools generally emphasize "daylighting," the use of natural light. Combined with healthy indoor air quality, this not only improves students’ health but also enhances their performance. A study conducted in California by the Heschong Mahone Group for Pacific Gas & Electric found a compelling connection between student performance and daylighting. The study analyzed test scores for more than 21,000 students from three major school districts and found that those students with the most daylighting progressed up to 20% faster on math tests and 26% on reading tests than those with the least. Several other studies have reached similar conclusions. In relationship to daylighting’s effect on student health, a study conducted by Innovative Designs in North Carolina found that students in full-spectrum light were healthier and attended school 3.2 to 3.8 days more per year. The study further found that because of the additional vitamin D received by students in full-spectrum light, they had nine times less dental decay and grew in height an average of 2.1 cm more over a two-year period than students attending school with average light. What Makes a School Green? Many of the features of a high-performance "green" school are good for the environment. For example, well-designed daylighting reduces the energy used for artificial lighting and heating. More generally, a high-performance school utilizes highly energy-efficient systems for heating, cooling, air handling, and lighting, and avoids using larger systems or appliances than necessary. Doing site planning in an environmentally responsible manner is another important aspect of building a green school. To the extent possible, natural areas are preserved and the impact on the surrounding environment is kept as small as possible. In addition, a high-performance green school can incorporate the use of renewable energy, especially solar photovoltaics for electricity or clean biomass systems for heat. By doing this, the school building can help build the market for renewable energy technologies, reduce air pollution, slow global warming, and increase the use of clean, locally available energy sources. A Building that Teaches In addition to its environmental, financial, and health benefits, a green school is a building that teaches. A rooftop photovoltaic system, for example, can be used to increase students’ interest in science, math, and other subjects. More generally, a successful high- performance school teaches students, teachers, and even community members about sustainable construction and the environment. It can be a model building that introduces the entire community to building techniques, features, and design strategies that can be incorporated into a wide range of buildings—homes, businesses, and institutions. And, in what is surely an important message for students and adults alike, a high performance green school teaches about the value of looking at the big picture—weighing one’s decisions in relationship to their long-term implications. Why Aren’t All New Schools Green? Given all the advantages of a high-performance green school, why don’t all school construction projects take this approach? For one thing, the design costs can be higher, as can some of the construction costs. Even though these expenses will be more than outweighed by the savings in operating costs, a school district may not have the legal or financial latitude to increase its initial construction budget or choose anyone other than the low bidder for the architectural or construction work. In addition, a successful green school takes more advance planning than the typical school construction project does. A school district’s building committee has to put extra time and effort into setting objectives for the building project, putting together a team of professionals that can work effectively together, and then working closely with those professionals. Because few building committee members have participated in a previous major school construction project, the extra attention required to achieve a high- performance school can seem daunting. It is so much simpler to just go ahead and build a more conventional school. On the other hand, although it requires some extra effort, it is not ultimately that difficult for a building committee to identify what it believes would make a school a healthy, appealing place for students and teachers, or what would decrease its ongoing operating costs or environmental impact. And because increasing numbers of architects, engineers, builders, and contractors are interested in green buildings practices, it’s getting easier to find appropriate people to work on a project to build a high-performance school. If a good team is put in place from the start, the rest of the process will likely proceed smoothly. More and more communities are concluding that it’s worth it to try to build a high- performance green school. After all, school decision makers generally take their responsibilities very seriously. They don’t want to saddle their community with higher than necessary ongoing costs. And they want to do what they can to help their community’s greatest treasure—its children. A high-performance school can improve the health, happiness, and school performance of hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of children over the many decades that the building will remain in use. Meghan Houlihan last year served as NESEA’s Renewable Energy Outreach Coordinator. Why Fuel Cells? The nation seemed to be humming along at a steady pace, but on September 11th we were suddenly faced with re-evaluating, refocusing, and re-energizing in preparation for an uncertain future. Instead of accepting the norm, we began looking for alternative solutions. In particular, Americans became more interested in ensuring the stability and reliability of our energy supply. But what will this interest mean? The public will demand more input, control, and choices. People will strive for energy independence and expect that the environment will be protected. While solutions will not be immediate, fuel cells will play an increasingly important role. What Are Fuel Cells? They are efficient, reliable power generating devices that can be used as alternative energy sources for schools, industrial facilities, office buildings, vehicles, and homes. They generate power by directly converting chemical energy into technology to create power without the use of combustion. Their only emission is pure water which makes them safe, quiet, and extremely clean. An amateur English physicist invented fuel cells more than 150 years ago, but it wasn’t until people began to venture into space that fuel cells found their first practical application. Needing a reliable source of electricity—and drinking water—NASA turned to fuel cells. The fuel cell technology for US manned space missions dating back to the Apollo program was developed in Connecticut. There is no generic size for fuel cells. Instead, their size is determined by potential applications and can therefore vary dramatically. For instance, portable devices such as cell phones, video cameras, lap-top computers, and vacuum cleaners would require fuel cells ranging from the size of a pencil tip to the size of a small lunch box. In contrast, fuel cells for automobiles, bikes, scooters, golf carts, and wheelchairs would range in size from that of a cooler to a car engine. Fuel cells for commercial and residential uses are anywhere from the size of a stove to the size of a bus. Why Are Fuel Cells Necessary? There are four main reasons why it is highly desirable for the US to develop fuel cell technology: Greater energy security and independence. Mechanical breakdowns, storms, growing demand for energy generation, and political conflict throughout the world could hinder the steady stream of electricity we expect and rely on. Fuel cells offer a viable alternative, particularly for systems requiring 24/7 operation. Distributed generation of energy. Distributed generation is the concept of having many smaller power systems instead of one giant one. Efficiency would largely be improved as a result of the close proximity of power generation, the reduced investments necessary for disbursement, and the reduction in harmful pollution that centralized distribution systems traditionally produce. A similar move was made by industry years ago from large, centralized mainframe computers to individual desktop units—imagine life without that technological advance now! Opportunities for economic development. Each new fuel cell company creates jobs which foster economic growth. Jobs evolve directly from the manufacture, design, installation, servicing, and marketing of fuel cells—but they also arise indirectly from businesses that offer transportation, equipment, and professional services. Unlimited applications and uses. The possibilities and uses for fuel cells are boundless. Along with the obvious large-scale uses, smaller potential applications exist too. In fact, it is expected that, in the near future, fuel cells will power cell phones, laptop computers, lawn mowers, and perhaps even vacuum cleaners. Connecticut’s Role in Fuel Cell Technology Fuel cells are an important part of Connecticut’s energy future. The Clean Energy Fund (CEF), created in 1998 by the Connecticut General Assembly and administered by Connecticut Innovations, invests in enterprises responsible for the development of sustainable energy. The fund is actively promoting fuel cell commercialization. To date, CEF: Has committed more than one-third of its budget over five years to the development and deployment of fuel cells. Has committed funding for two sustainable and renewable energy education and research facilities—Connecticut Global Fuel Cell Center at the University of Connecticut with a $3.5 million challenge endowment and the Institute for Sustainable Energy at Eastern Connecticut State University in Willimantic with a $3.5 million challenge grant. Has funded the development and installation of a fuel cell system, produced by FuelCell Energy, Inc., for a new building located at the University of Connecticut’s Mansfield campus. Has funded a fuel cell, produced by UTC Fuel Cells, to be used at South Windsor High School to enable the school to be used as an emergency shelter in the town’s disaster-relief plan. Has provided financial support to Proton Energy Systems, Inc. to accelerate the company’s commercial deployment of Proton’s UNIGEN® fuel cell product family. The state is home to a number of small start-up fuel cell research and technology development companies, as well as three major fuel cell manufacturers—UTC Fuel Cells of South Windsor, FuelCell Energy of Danbury, and Proton Energy Systems of Rocky Hill. These companies have recently made great strides: The Connecticut Juvenile Training School in Middletown recently installed a 1.2 MW fuel cell system—the largest single installation of fuel cells in the world. The fuel cells were provided by UTC Fuel Cells which also installed two smaller 200 kW units at the casino operated by the Mohegan Tribe. In October 2001 a deal valued at some $6.2 million, was reached by the Naval Research Laboratory and Proton Energy Systems, Inc. to apply its technology to advanced space propulsion and energy systems. Also in October 2001, FuelCell Energy, Inc., of Danbury received an order from PPL Spectrum, Inc., for the purchase of a 250 kW Direct FuelCell® ("DFC®") power plant for the US Coast Guard Air Station in Bourne, Massachusetts. The Northeast as a Piece of the Renewable Energy Puzzle While Connecticut has taken the lead, there is a strong movement throughout the northeast to advance fuel cell technology. As the industry grows, we can expect to see more businesses established to follow the path being pioneered by companies such as Acumentrics Corp., of Massachusetts, H Power of New Jersey, JLG Industries of Pennsylvania, Millennium Cell of New Jersey, and Plug Power, LLC, of New York. Cutting-edge research is happening at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Worcester Polytechnic Institution in Massachusetts. The recent establishment of the Connecticut Global Fuel Cell Center at the University of Connecticut will help advance the research and development of fuel cells. Additionally, northeast states have several initiatives established for making clean energy possible. At least one of the following policies—a renewables portfolio standard, a system benefits charge, or a requirement that electricity suppliers disclose fuel mix and emission information—has been mandated throughout many states in the region. Global Advancement and Involvement Globally, fuel cell technology has been earning more recognition and support. Japan is actively pursuing development and installation of fuel cells. China and India are also looking to fuel cells as a clean and viable alternative for automobiles and on-site generation applications. In Guangzhou, China, a UTC fuel cell is being installed at an electrical farm equipment facility. DaimlerChrysler unveiled a fuel-cell-powered Town & Country minivan, "Natrium," in December 2001 which uses New Jersey based Millennium Cell’s Hydrogen on Demand system. Ballard Power Systems Inc., a maker of fuel cells, and Osaka Gas are developing stationary power generators for the Japanese residential market. In the U.S., a "national energy plan" is perched as a top issue before the Senate for 2002 and fuel cell development is supported by many federal and state government officials. US Representative Nancy Johnson, who recently presented a bill in the 107th Congress to provide tax credits for the home or business purchase of fuel cells, said, "Central to any sound energy policy are incentives for conservation and alternative energy sources, because our fossil fuel supplies won’t last forever. Developing such cutting-edge technologies as fuel cells will reduce our reliance on foreign oil, give consumers greater choice, stabilize energy prices and benefit the environment at the same time." Fuel cell commercialization is not a distant idea any more—in fact in several instances it is here today. However, technology development, testing and deployment requires continued financial and community support. Where would we be today without taking chances? Moreover, where would we be without supporting technology that can shape the future? Imagine having had the opportunity to support such a revolutionary invention as the light bulb, but not having the interest to take the chance on a new invention! Our support is needed now more than ever to ensure we become an energy independent society. Subhash Chandra, Ph.D., is the Managing Director, Technology at the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund. The Benefits of Lighting Retrofit Projects It is much easier to convince a business to invest in a project with environmental benefits if it will save that business money. Lighting retrofit projects often fit into this category, especially in the case of industrial buildings. Typically, in a well-designed project, lighting energy costs can be reduced by 40-60 percent, and sometimes more. These savings are achieved by a combination of replacing the primary working components within light fixtures (i.e. newer energy-efficient lamps and ballasts); redesigning fixtures for a different configuration of lamps, ballasts, and reflectors; and replacing existing fixtures with new, more efficient ones. Additional savings may come from installing occupancy sensors so that lights can be automatically turned off when no one is in an area. In addition, a lighting retrofit project can save a business on maintenance costs—both materials and labor. This is achieved through a combination of products with longer lives and/or a reduced number of components. The cost-effectiveness of a lighting project is, of course, directly influenced by the number of hours that the lights are actually used. If a factory has many lights, but they are only turned on for one shift, then the savings may not warrant the cost of upgrading. The more the lights are on, the greater the energy savings opportunity. The Financial Decision-making Process Before deciding to embark on a lighting upgrade, a company must determine whether the payback period is attractive enough to warrant the purchase. For example, a $100,000 lighting project with $40,000 annual energy savings has a 2.5-year payback. In industrial facilities, if the payback is greater than three years, there is usually not much interest. For some businesses the payback period required may be considerably shorter. Some companies put additional variables into the payback equation based on their unique accounting methods or tax situations, making it even more challenging to provide a payback number that is acceptable. While most businesses base lighting retrofit project decisions almost entirely on financial criteria, some factor improved light levels or light quality into the decision. The goal in lighting retrofit design is to achieve an appropriate balance between energy savings and light quantity/quality. Environmental benefits are usually not a significant part of the decision-making process, although some companies will post the environmental benefits of a lighting project (reduced electricity generation = reduced pollution) for their employees to see and/or publish it in corporate annual reports. When all of the costs associated with a lighting project—material, labor, project management, trash disposal, lamp recycling, lifts, etc.—are added up, the project often becomes too expensive to be approved. Fortunately, the larger New England utility companies offer financial incentives in the form of rebates to encourage facility owners to undertake lighting retrofit projects as well as other energy conservation measures. The current industrial rebate programs provide sufficient incentives to "buy down" the project cost to levels that meet many businesses’ payback requirements. Hopefully these programs will not go away. They are achieving the desired result of encouraging many businesses to replace older inefficient lighting components with new state-of-the-art technologies and save millions of kilowatt hours of electricity annually. Overcoming Additional Obstacles Even if a lighting project has a payback period within the parameters of the company’s requirements, it may still have to compete with other budgetary demands. In industrial facilities, lighting projects often have to compete with budget requests for new production equipment. If the lights work, even inefficiently, the budgeting decision may favor a machinery purchase that can increase production and revenues. Or, the lighting project may be put on a back burner to be considered in a future round of budgetary decisions. Financing options may make the purchase of a lighting project more feasible if available cash is scarce. Financing can be structured so that the monthly payment is less than the monthly savings. This means that there is no initial capital outlay required, and the project will result in an immediate positive cash flow. Financing can enable some projects to move forward that might not otherwise have a chance. Another obstacle to overcome is proving that calculated energy savings figures are accurate. On an electric bill, the lighting portion is not separated from anything else, and, in industrial facilities, the lighting load is usually a much smaller portion of the total electric bill than their process load (production equipment). Therefore, if the electricity use for production equipment varies over time, energy savings resulting from a lighting upgrade project may or may not be visible on subsequent electric bills. To prove that the savings that we calculate will really be achieved, and without sacrificing light levels, ESCO Energy Service Company always includes energy savings and light level verification testing as part of the project. The testing consists of taking digital light levels and kilowatt readings from a representative number of the main fixture types. We then upgrade or replace those fixtures in the way that we have specified in our proposal. This is followed by repeating the light level and kilowatt readings on the upgraded fixtures and comparing the "before" and "after" numbers. In almost every instance, the tests create a lot of enthusiasm for proceeding with the project. It’s one thing to see potential benefits on paper, and it is another thing to see upgraded fixtures next to the old ones producing equal or more light using 40-60% less electricity. Finally, before factory owners/managers sign contracts for lighting projects, they need assurance that the installation will not cause significant disruption to their operations. Energy savings are great, but job number one for an industrial facility is to produce products. If anything gets in the way of that, it costs the company money. Therefore, a contract will never be signed for an industrial lighting project if there is any doubt about the caliber of the company installing the project. The quality of the proposal, the ability to address the customer’s concerns, attention to detail, a successful test installation, and a solid list of references that can be called and/or visited are the main things that will alleviate fears. Jobs and the Environment Industrial lighting upgrades are a great win-win for the economy and the environment. On the economic side, manufacturers can cut costs, become more competitive, and provide a healthier workplace for their employees. Companies like ESCO that offer lighting retrofit services provide jobs for electricians, project managers, and administrative and salespeople. ESCO purchases millions of dollars worth of lighting equipment and related hardware from many different suppliers annually. We also rent lifts, utilize regular disposal companies and EPA-authorized hazardous waste handlers (to recycle lamps and PCB ballasts), and provide business to finance companies. The environment wins because substantially cutting the demand for electricity in large industrial buildings significantly reduces the need to build more oil, coal, and nuclear power plants with their associated air pollution, global warming, and radiation hazards. Reducing energy demand and generating energy in a cleaner, more efficient manner are two sides of the same sustainable energy coin. Andrew Bloom is a lighting retrofit specialist with ESCO Energy Services Company based in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. He can be reached at abloom@lightingretrofit.com. Improving the Forecast for the Solar Industry In recent years, promising technological advances and an expanding array of potential applications for photovoltaic (PV) systems have bolstered the prospects for a thriving solar energy industry in New England. However, progress has been hindered by ongoing financial barriers, regulatory hurdles, and the high cost of solar power. The Massachusetts Technology Collaborative’s Renewable Energy Trust has therefore designed an innovative new program to provide financial and technical assistance that should help develop a sustainable, competitive PV industry in the Commonwealth. Trends in the Solar Industry Photovoltaic systems are used in a broad range of applications, including consumer products, grid-connected, and stand-alone applications. Worldwide demand has been growing at about 25% a year. In 2000, almost 300 megawatts of new generating capacity was installed throughout the world with 30% of this new capacity in Japan, 20% in Germany, and 10% in the United States. However, the fastest growing markets are in the developing world, where PV is used as an alternative to extending the electricity grid. Because of the robust international markets, American PV companies’ sales are primarily oversees and they are increasing. Sales by Massachusetts companies sales exceeded $43 million in 2000. More than three-quarters (78%) of these sales were in international markets, with the rest in the US and less than 2% of the total in Massachusetts. However, because 70% of the companies’ expenditures were in Massachusetts, the industry has an important economic and job-creation impact in the Commonwealth. It therefore makes sense to promote the development of the industry, even if most of the companies’ production continues to be exported. At the same time, there is considerable potential to increase the use of PV within the Commonwealth. At the moment, the total installed capacity of PV systems in Massachusetts is under 500 kilowatts, much less than a single typical fossil fuel power plant. Many of the existing PV systems were installed in the 1980s, including a 100 kilowatt system at Beverly High School. To substantially increase the number of systems in place, the industry needs help in overcoming some significant financial and regulatory barriers. Although PV is cost- effective in off-grid applications in the Northeast , the cost of PV-generated electricity in grid-connected applications is substantially higher than fossil fuel and other renewable energy alternatives. Of course, PV has other valuable attributes—it does not produce air emissions, it is a distributed resource than can avoid distribution system investments, its generation is highest at peak times when the value of generation is highest, and it has broad public support. But, under current regulatory and market conditions, consumers installing PV systems can capture only some of the potential value. Developing the Industry MTC’s Renewable Energy Trust’s "Solar-to-Market Initiative" is designed both to encourage greater use of PV systems in Massachusetts and to promote the development of the Commonwealth’s PV industry, so that it can compete effectively in the global marketplace. To assist the industry, the Trust provided financial support for establishing the Solar Energy Business Association of New England (SEBANE). SEBANE supports the development of PV-powered energy systems through regulatory policy advocacy, public awareness, and legal efforts to enable solar resources to compete fairly in the power market. SEBANE provides PV businesses with a cohesive voice in breaking down the barriers -- including high capital costs and regulatory constraints – that have hindered the full realization of solar technology’s potential in this region. Since the opening of the "Solar Energy Lab" at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology more than 20 years ago, the PV industry has grown steadily in New England. In Massachusetts alone, an estimated 50 or more companies are active in PV equipment manufacturing, system design, financing and project development. By supporting the formation of a professionally managed association, the Trust has established a conduit for tapping the expertise within this major segment of the renewable energy industry. Together, the Trust and SEBANE are aggressively working to identify the best strategies for leveraging Trust investments. Supporting SEBANE and eliminating market barriers are only the first steps in accomplishing this objective. With SEBANE’s assistance, the Trust is working to define a comprehensive $10 million initiative for expanding the production and use of PV technologies and to develop the cluster of firms that produce products and services within the solar energy industry in the Commonwealth. Program concepts currently under development include a PV business development program to provide loans and other business financing opportunities to Massachusetts PV companies. The loan fund would help these companies expand by offering loan products, with terms that are better than those available from commercial lenders, and by supporting activities that may not qualify for a commercial loan. The business development program would also examine the need for training and certification of PV system installers in Massachusetts and the region. Installing Systems The Trust and SEBANE are also working together to develop a program to increase the installation of PV systems in the Commonwealth. A key objective is to minimize the installed cost of systems by encouraging geographic clusters of systems and bulk purchasing. A second objective is to integrate PV into the building and trades industries in Massachusetts by providing incentives for the installation of PV systems in new buildings. The PV installation programs will foster the expansion of the Massachusetts PV industry and create opportunities for increasing overall consumer awareness about renewable energy. This solar energy initiative is emblematic of the Renewable Energy Trust’s collaborative approach to working with companies involved in the renewable energy industry. Rather than creating a temporary, artificial market through a government subsidy program, the organization is utilizing its resources to foster sustainability in the highly competitive energy market. The goals of this initiative are ambitious: an abundant supply of clean, affordable electricity from renewable solar energy and a growing PV industry that produces jobs and tax benefits for the Commonwealth. Look for the collaborative approach to shorten the timeframe needed to achieve these important objectives. Greg Watson is Vice President of Renewable Energy at the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative. He has nearly 25 years of high- level experience in environmentally sound agricultural and community planning.