# Presentation: 855990

## Dale Sartor & Evan Mills

- _[DASartor@lbl.gov](mailto:DASartor@lbl.gov)_ | _[Emills@lbl.](mailto:Emills@lbl.gov)__[gov](mailto:Emills@lbl.gov)_

- Public Interest Energy Research (PIER)California Energy Commission
- California Institute for Energy Efficiency (CIEE)

- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
- Applications Team (http://ateam.lbl.gov)

- Bridging the “Valley of Death”in the High-Tech Buildings  Sector

- January 15, 2004

**Presentation to Emerging Technologies Coordinating Council**

## Why High-Tech Buildings?

- Highly energy intensive
- Labs, cleanrooms, data centers
- Continuously operating (24 x 7 x 365)
- Underserved markets
- Ripe for efficiency improvement
- 40-50% efficiency improvement opportunities
- Industries are engaged; concerned about:
- cost, availability, reliability, and power quality

- OVERVIEW

## Why High-Tech (cont’d)

- Many sectors involved
- Electronics, pharmaceuticals, biotech, communications, research, education, ...
- Industries of the Future: Large and growing numbers of relevant facilities, especially in California
- Retention of industries in California
- Technology solutions may have broader applicability in other building types

- OVERVIEW

## 40% reduction in energy use per square foot from 1985 baseline 
$4 million/year more research based on 1985 energy prices 
Improved worker productivity
Safer environment
Improved reliability

- Attainable Savings:
- LBNL Facility-Wide Example

- 40% reduction in energy use per square foot from 1985 baseline
- $4 million/year more research based on 1985 energy prices
- Improved worker productivity
- Safer environment
- Improved reliability

- California Savings Potential

## Tools
Laboratory Design Guide 
Benchmarking
Design Intent Tool
Labs for the 21st Century
Leadership
Design assistance
Courses
Labs21 Conferences

- Prior LBNL R&D - Mk’t Xf’m

- Tools
- Laboratory Design Guide
- Benchmarking
- Design Intent Tool
- Labs for the 21st Century
- Leadership
- Design assistance
- Courses
- Labs21 Conferences

## PIER Activities: Cleanrooms

- Benchmarking and Best Practices
- Demand-controlled filtration
- Mini-environments
- Demonstrations
- Fan-Filter Unit test procedure

- OVERVIEW

- Cleanroom Measured Electricity
- End-use Allocation

*> Based on Roadmap;**   emphasizes technology transfer*

## Benchmarking and Best Practices
Demonstrations
Berkeley Fume Hood
Overcoming barriers (CAL/OSHA)
Side-by-side testing
Demonstrations

> Based on Roadmap;emphasizes technology transfer

- PIER Activities: Labs

- Benchmarking and Best Practices
- Demonstrations
- Berkeley Fume Hood
- Overcoming barriers (CAL/OSHA)
- Side-by-side testing
- Demonstrations
*> Based on Roadmap;**emphasizes technology transfer*

## PIER Activities: Data Centers

- Benchmarking and Best Practices
- Investigate UPS systems
- Investigate power supplies in IT equipment
- Collaborate on building interface developments
- Demonstrations
*>  Based on Roadmap;**emphasize technology transfer*

- OVERVIEW

## Opportunity:

- Fan-filter Units Test

- What’s a FFU?
- Maintains specific cleanroom airflow
- Consists of a small fan, motor, and a HEPA/ULPA filter enclosed in a box
- Fits into common cleanroom ceiling grids, typically 2x4 ft or 4x4 ft
- Use considerable energy for air re-circulation
- Typical FFU = ~$15/ft2-year (vs ~$1/ft2 for typical office)

- FFU Test Procedure

## The Need for Test Standards

- FFU’s gaining in popularity in California
- Need is analogous to past experience with windows (non-standard rating/labeling >>> NFRC)
- Performance data/claims of suppliers not comparable
- Strong industry interest
*Lack of standard test procedure creates barriers to energy efficiency*

- FFU Test Procedure

- FFU Efficiencies

- FFU Test Procedure

- Efficiency

- Typical
- Operating
- range

- FFU Power per Unit Airflow
- (Range of units tested @125pa)

## Goals

- PIER activities: standard test procedure for fan-filter units
- Identify relevant performance metric(s)
- Establish a method for consistently reporting the energy performance of fan-filter units
- Possible utility roles
- Pilot testing and refinement of protocol
- Test units typical in California market
- Baseline development, e.g. to support utility incentive programs

- FFU Test Procedure

## Collaborators

- Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology (IEST)
- Industrial Technology ResearchInstitute (ITRI)
- Air Movement and ControlAssociation (AMCA)
- Motorola

- FFU Test Procedure

## Purpose: containment & worker safety
Primary source of laboratory ventilation
Traditional hoods pull large quantities of air past worker

- Opportunity:
- Fume Hoods

- Fume Hood

- Purpose: containment & worker safety
- Primary source of laboratory ventilation
- Traditional hoods pull large quantities of air past worker

## Electricity & Gas Intensive

- A single standard Fume hood uses 3.5x as much energy as typical home

## The Berkeley Hood: Challenges

-  Near market-ready, but...
-  Must move from concept  to commercial unit
-  Not accepted by  CAL-OSHA
-  Significant other  institutional barriers
*Note: Berkeley Hood listed in ETCC technology database*

## Smoke containment...

**Smoke visualization test at 30% “normal” flow**

## Smoke in Supply Plenums...

## Savings Potential

- The Berkeley Hood:No Longer Alone!

- Innovations coming from industry
- Labconco “Protector Xstream”
- Fisher Hamilton “Pioneer”
- LabCrafters “Air Sentry”
- >> All have been tested per ASHRAE 110-1995 and pass ANSI/AIHA Z9.5-2002 at 60 FPM

## Goals

- PIER activities
- Obtain CAL/OSHA Variances to operate Berkeley Hood demonstrations
- Define relevant tests & perform side-by-side testing
- Successful demonstration of larger hoods
- Possible utility roles
- Collaborate on demonstrations
- Support CAL-OSHA decision making, e.g. by convening experts to validate performance/safety of innovative hood designs and test methods

- Fume Hood

## Genesis of program >1995 (CIEE)
Fume hood demonstrations (PG&E, SDG&E)
Training (PG&E, SCE)
Benchmarking (PG&E)

- Genesis of program >1995 (CIEE)
- Fume hood demonstrations (PG&E, SDG&E)
- Training (PG&E, SCE)
- Benchmarking (PG&E)

- Utility Collaborations

- Utility members join existing CEC Project Advisory Committees and/or working groups
- Collaborate on demonstrations & baselining
- Market characterization & focused training/education (e.g. “Best Practices”)
- Tool development/deployment
- E.g. Design Intent Tool
- Overcoming institutional barriers

- Bridging the “Valley of Death”
- Collaboration with ETCC