Sustain-ablility

Sustainable development of wastewater infrastructure, GT Daigger, D Burack, V Rubino

Wastewater management and sustainability, GT Daigger, D Burack, V Rubino

Pollution prevention applies to wastewater treatment, KN Irvine, TR Hersey Jr, MC Rossi, J Caruso, JE Jordan

Educating for sustainability, A Ahmadi

Energize with state-of-the-art technologies, BR Klett, RJ Wilson

Sustainability for New York's drinking water, TA Endreny

The “greening” of the building industry, MA Stallone

Water conservation in a water-intensive industry, G. Wainwright

Sustainable design at NYCDEP, P Zimmerman, J Tyler, VJ DeSantis,N Ramanan

People and places

Fall 2001 — Vol. 31, No. 3

Knapp St. Lab / Environmental Visitor Center

Green building showcase
 
by Philip Zimmerman, RA; Joyette Tyler; Vincent J. DeSantis, RA; Nagarajan Ramanan, PE

With its Knapp Street Laboratory/Environmental Visitor Center, the New York City Department of Environmental Protection is providing a bold new direction for a public works and environmental educational facility. The new 30,000-ft² structure will house a water quality monitoring laboratory complex and visitors center, an educational resource open to the public. Moreover, it will be an environmentally responsible building that will serve as a showplace of sustainable design. The new center will be located at the Coney Island Water Pollution Control Plant on Shell Bank Estuary in Brooklyn

This endeavor required that all building materials and systems, design, and construction approaches, be evaluated based on the precepts of environmentally sound, sustainable design. They incorporate green concepts together with renewable and alternative energies, considering global as well as local issues in selecting building siting, materials, energy use, and building layout.

The facility will promote a greater public awareness of current ideas on environmental sustainability, including alternative and renewable energy and energy conservation. It reflects new attitudes and goals for the relationship of public works facilities to the environment and the local community.

The orientation also provides waterfront views and visitor access along Shell Bank Creek.

“Smart siting” concepts

Answering programmatic needs while maximizing alternative energy opportunities required the careful integration of building siting in relation to building form and function. “Smart siting” concepts that work with nature were reviewed to optimize building location for energy-efficient orientations, building massing, and best possible use of outdoor space. Studies indicated that the building was best located to the north on the site, allowing maximum southern exposure for the native mesic demonstration gardens; that is, plantings adapted to a moderately moist habitat. This siting provided the most efficient use of natural light, active and passive solar energy gain, and the greatest efficiency for building-integrated photovoltaic roof panels.

Visitors have access to the outdoor garden areas either through “sun space”—a room that captures solar energy in winter—or through the main exhibit gallery whose glass doors can be completely opened during warm weather for contact with the water and outdoor exhibits. The main exhibit area is designed to take advantage of winter passive solar heat gain, natural breezes, and natural ventilation assisted by the stack effect amplified by the shape of the Visitors Center roof with vents along the highest peaks.

Light control devices on south-facing glass progressively excludes unwanted sunlight from the building as summer approaches; “suncatchers” on the west and east façades transform low-sun glare into pleasant diffuse interior lighting. Natural daylight is distributed throughout the building using interior light shelves, sun pipes, and light distributing soffits and ceilings.

East side of Visitors' Center

Energy efficient building design

Two criteria were used in selecting building systems. First, use of nonrenewable energy sources was minimized through energy recovery and conservation. Second, renewable energy technologies were used where possible to meet part of the building's energy demand.

Laboratories are big energy-consumers because they require high round-the-clock ventilation rates. This presented unique opportunities to recover and reduce energy usage. Energy recovery coils placed in exhaust air streams recapture ventilation heat, and heat recovered from the building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) array will be used to regenerate dehumidification media.

North face

Other energy conserving features include increased envelope insulation—walls are R25 and roofs approximate R40—and high-efficiency window systems that reduce heat transmission—wavelength-selective superthermal efficient glass, some with R10 thermal resistance. Daylighting controls and occupancy sensors yield electric lighting energy savings. Earth below the building is used as a heat sink to temper intake air in the winter and help with air conditioning loads in the summer.

Renewable energy sources include reclaimed energy from wastewater digesters to take advantage of a biomass energy opportunity using a carbon dioxide-neutral energy strategy. This gas, produced by the treatment process at the Coney Island Water Pollution Control Plant, powers generators to provide the bulk of the building's electrical needs.

South face

In addition to the large polycrystalline BIPV array, active solar energy capture is accomplished by vacuum solar heat tube technology. Conventional skylight framing is used for installation of the built-in photovoltaic panels. Some areas along the exhibit room roof perimeter have translucent photovoltaic panels to provide light transmission for exhibits. Visitors to the center will be able to monitor the daily output of electricity generated by solar technology.

The building's energy conservation elements significantly minimize lifecycle costs. Overall, the combination of renewable energy and energy conservation measures has reduced the building's loads, compared to conventional building technologies, by 40% for annual heating, by 30% for annual cooling, and by 10% of electrical and heating needs for a building of this type.

West face

Water-efficient building design

For water conservation, only mesic landscaping is used. Initial establishment of exterior plantings will be accomplished using underground drip irrigation systems. All rainwater from the exhibit center roofs will be collected in an underground cistern and used to establish vegetation around the building. Very low-flow water fixtures have been incorporated into all toilet facilities.

Resource-efficient materials

Selection criteria for materials included a cradle-to-cradle environmental lifecycle analysis. A variety of environmentally sensitive selection strategies were employed. Materials were reviewed from source to reuse or ultimate disposal. Available regional materials as well as those with low-embodied energy and those containing verifiably high post- and preconsumer recycle content were favored. Materials that contribute to environmental clean-up such as ceramic tile made with discarded automobile windshield glass and ceramic tile made from waste from previous tile manufacturing were also used.

Wood products must be from sources where verifiably sustainable forest management programs have been implemented. Locally obtained slate flooring will be checked for naturally occurring pollutants, such as radon. All wood pallet waste produced during construction will be salvaged and remanufactured into new wood flooring. Precast wall panels, in addition to incorporating high levels of fly ash and recycled synthetic carpet fiber, will incorporate waste mirror glass and green glass cullet.

Promoting a healthful working environment

Indoor environmental quality and health are addressed by avoiding materials, such as carpeting, which tend to off-gas pollutants or that have the capability to absorb and release pollutants and environmental irritants. Fresh air intakes and exhausts are carefully located, and adequate quantities of fresh air are ensured through carbon filtration and increased air changes.

Only zero-VOC paints, water-based coating products, natural adhesives and finishes such as linseed oil and beeswax, naturally antibacterial linoleum flooring, and fibers consisting of natural cotton or wool were used for the project. Wood sawdust waste and recycled plastic wood and soybean/waste newspaper composite were used to construct finished cabinetry. No phenol formaldehyde adhesives or laminates were used, and materials which require frequent or strong cleaning solutions for maintenance were avoided.

Lifecycle cost analysis

The concept of sustainable design is to produce buildings that limit adverse environmental and health effects throughout their lifecycle. The goal of sustainable lifecycle cost analysis was to make an objective cost comparison between a base (conventionally designed) building and a green building. The cost criteria identified by the NYCDEP for selection of sustainable design features was to utilize proven technology without increasing the capital cost of the building by more than 10%.

The criteria for the analysis used a projected life of the building of 40 yr and 20 yr for the equipment. All costs associated with ownership over the life of the project affected by the green building features were evaluated, including:

• Capital construction
• Energy
• Building O&M (nonenergy)
• Staffing
• Global environmental benefits.

Total construction cost for the Knapp Street Laboratory/Visitors Center building is estimated to be $26 million. The additional capital cost of sustainable design features is estimated to be $1.3 million—5% of the building cost—well below the original project goal of 10%.

To evaluate the building's energy features, the cost to operate a base building in conformance with the New York Energy Conservation Construction Code was used. Results showed that energy cost savings for operating the green building was conservatively estimated to be 29% lower than the base building.

In the lifecycle cost analysis, we have shown how a green building can contribute to the bottom line by saving energy and providing a healthy indoor environment. The overall net saving of the green building will be $1.4 million based on present worth and $6.7 million based on total cost. The simple pay-back for the additional cost of $1.3 million for green building features is 8 yr. On total energy savings alone, simple payback would be 16 yr.

The analysis also identified other environmental benefits that do not lend themselves easily to direct economic analysis, such as the benefit of more healthy workers and global benefits such as reduced greenhouse gas and ozone depleting emissions.

The analysis considered that use of high quality high performance equipment is not only energy efficient but also more durable, requiring less replacement or repair than base building equipment. Building commissioning includes a pollution prevention plan for operating and maintaining the building as well as provision for a database to permit evaluation of the building's sustainable features.

 

The analysis proved that a green building contributes to the bottom line by saving energy and by providing a healthy indoor environment. It linked environmental benefits with a clear economic payback, demonstrating that designing with the environment in mind need not cost more than conventional design.
____________
Philip Zimmerman, RA, is a senior associate with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. Joyette Tyler is a senior project engineer with Malcolm Pirnie. Vincent J. DeSantis, RA, is deputy director of facilities design, New York City Department of Environmental Protection. Nagarajan Ramanan, PE is project manager with Baker Engineering NY, Inc.