An Energy Assessment of Fume Hoods with and without Automated Sash Positioning Control Systems at Amgen, Inc.

Transcription

1 Design & Engineering Services An Energy Assessment of Fume Hoods with and without Automated Sash Positioning Control Systems at Amgen, Inc. Emerging Technologies Final Report Prepared by: Design and Engineering Services Customer Service Business Unit Southern California Edison July 2007

2 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET Acknowledgements Southern California Edison s Design & Engineering Services (D&ES) group is responsible for this project. It was developed as part of Southern California Edison s Emerging Technology program under internal project number ET D&ES project manager Dr. Roger Sung conducted this technology evaluation with overall guidance and management from Dr. Henry Lau. For more information on this project, contact roger.sung@sce.com. Disclaimer Special thanks to David Yamashiro of Harris Group, Inc. (HGI) from Seattle, Washington for managing the project and ensuring success of the assessment. This report was prepared by Southern California Edison (SCE) and funded by California utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission. Reproduction or distribution of the whole or any part of the contents of this document without the express written permission of SCE is prohibited. This work was performed with reasonable care and in accordance with professional standards. However, neither SCE nor any entity performing the work pursuant to SCE s authority make any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with regard to this report, the merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose of the results of the work, or any analyses, or conclusions contained in this report. The results reflected in the work are generally representative of operating conditions; however, the results in any other situation may vary depending upon particular operating conditions. Southern California Edison Design & Engineering Services July 2007

3 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ASPCS AVG BMS CFM IR PSI SCE VAV Automatic Sash Positioning Control System Average Building Maintenance System Cubic Feet per Minute Infra-red Pounds per square inch Southern California Edison Variable Air Volume Southern California Edison Page i Design & Engineering Services July 2007

4 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...1 Fume hood Exhaust and Make-up Air Demand and Energy Savings...1 INTRODUCTION...5 Fume Hood Operation and Component breakdown...5 Typical ASPCS Components...5 Automated Sash Positioning Control System...6 Automated Sash Positioning Control System and energy conservation...8 Importance of Energy Usage and Conservation to Amgen...9 MONITORING AND DATA COLLECTION...9 Data Test #1...9 Data Test # Test 1 Results...11 Results Test CONCLUSIONS...21 RECOMMENDATIONS...24 Options for Determining Incentive Rebates...24 APPENDIX A...25 Comparison of Exhaust Values (Walk-in Fume Hood without Automated Sash Control) and (Walk-in Fume Hood with Sash Control) 26 Comparison of Exhaust Values EV (modified bench-top Fume Hood without Automated Sash Control) and EV (modified bench-top Fume Hood with Automated Sash Control) 27 Comparison of Exhaust Values EV (modified bench-top Fume Hood without Automated Sash Positioning Control system) and EV (modified bench-top Fume Hood with Automated Sash Control) 28 Comparison of Exhaust Valves EV (Walk in Fume hood without Automated Sash Positioning Control system) and EV (Walk in Fume hood with Automated Sash Positioning Control System) 30 Comparison of Exhaust Valves EV (Walk-in Hood without Automated Sash Positioning Control system) and EV (Walk-In Fume hood with Automated Sash Positioning Control System) 31 Southern California Edison Page ii Design & Engineering Services July 2007

5 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This energy efficiency study determined the demand reduction and energy savings of 12 vertical sash, variable air volume fume hoods. The assessment compared the volumetric air flow rates of fume hoods with and without automated sash positioning control systems (ASPCS). Twelve hoods were studied: 6 hoods with automated sash positioning control systems and six without this sash control system at Amgen Laboratories. Amgen is a large biotechnology company with 651 fume hoods in operation at its Thousand Oaks, California headquarters facility. FUME HOOD EXHAUST AND MAKE-UP AIR DEMAND AND ENERGY SAVINGS This project established load profiles for the fume hoods with and without automated sash positioning control systems. The study measured the exhaust air quantity flowing through each monitored fume hood. The assessment compared the difference in exhaust from the hood and makeup air to the hood examining six fume hoods with automated sash positioning control systems (ASPCS) and six without the automated sash positioning controls. Results were based on a 14-day airflow monitoring schedule which was conducted 24-hours a day using the building maintenance system (BMS). This system is located in Amgen Building 29 in Thousand Oaks in Climate Zone 9. To correlate these findings with equipment located in other California climate zones, the airflow data collected at the Amgen site was used to generate load profiles. Using performance data from Amgen's existing central plant and HVAC systems, load profiles were generated with Trace 700 computer simulations.. Central plant equipment includes chillers, pumps, and boilers. Southern California Edison Company and Southern California Gas Company rate structures were used for 16 climate zones in California to determine variability in demand and energy savings at different geographic locations throughout the state. Two sets of data had to be collected at different time periods because the first set was not valid. The first data set was collected from November 8, 2006 to November 22, 2006, but, unfortunately, it was not representative due to unexpected obstructions in the direct path of the automatic sash hoods, such as empty bottles and buckets. This data was discarded since it was erroneous and showed very little difference in airflow rates. After corrective measures including removal of obstructions were made at the affected test hoods, the second set of data was collected between March 26, 2007 and April 9, Monitoring results showed averages of cfm difference between ASPCS and non ASPCS hoods. During the second set of data, daily walk through inspections of the test hoods was undertaken to verify proper operation of hoods with ASPCS and without ASPCS hoods. Table 1 compares the findings of annual kwh savings and kw demand reductions of hoods with ASPCS with hoods without ASPCS hoods for 16 California climate zones. Southern California Edison Page 1 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

6 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET The average energy cost of all 16 climate zones was $6.41 per cfm per yr. At Amgen, in Thousand Oaks, climate zone 9, the cost per cfm per yr. with ASPCS was $6.20. The average daily cfm usage from the six test hoods with ASPCS was 1960 cfm. The average daily cfm usage from the six test hoods without ASPCS was 4622 cfm. This represented a 58% reduction in daily airflow cfm use. Simulations showed a combined total electric and gas cost reduction of $15,106 per year for the six hoods with the automated sash positioning control system. When the installation costs of approximately $27,000 for the six ASPCS units are divided by the difference in utility costs ($15,106), a cost benefit ratio of 1.79 years is achieved. The kwh savings were 102,872 kwh for the six hoods in Region 9. (185,017 kwh with ASPCS versus 82,145 kwh without ASPCS). Each sash hood with an ASPCS installed would save approximately 17,145 kwh per year. If Amgen installed ASPCS on every vertical sash hood (150 hoods), would result in potential savings of 2,571,750 kwh/year or approximately $377,650/year. Southern California Edison Page 2 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

7 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET TABLE 1. COMPARISON OF ANNUAL ENERGY COSTS (KW) AND DEMAND (KWH) OF FUME HOODS WITH AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEMS (ASPCS) FUME HOODS WITH NON-ASPCS FUME HOODS IN 16 CALIFORNIA CLIMATE ZONES. Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $13,324 $30,649 $12,102 $28,256 $11,360 $26,481 $12,411 $27,024 Cost per cfm per year $6.79 $6.17 $5.79 $6.33 Annual kwh usage 79, ,290 78, ,158 76, ,000 81, ,208 On-Peak Demand (kw) Off-Peak Demand (kw) Mid-Peak Demand (kw) Region 5 Region 6 Region 7 Region 8 With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $11,590 $27,039 $11,513 $28,435 $12,138 $28,169 $12,689 $26,869 Cost per cfm per year $5.91 $5.87 $6.19 $6.47 Annual kwh usage 76, ,007 78, ,435 85, ,081 86, ,313 On-Peak Demand (kw) Off-Peak Demand (kw) Mid-Peak Demand (kw) Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Region 12 With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $12,152 $27,258 $12,835 $29,557 $12,562 $29,414 $12,228 $28,533 Cost per cfm per year $6.20 $6.55 $6.41 $6.29 Annual kwh usage 82, ,017 85, ,715 82, ,096 79, ,982 Southern California Edison Page 3 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

8 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET Table 1 (Continued). Comparison of Annual Energy Costs (kw) and Demand (kwh) of Fume Hoods with Automated Sash Positioning Control Systems (ASPCS) fume hoods with Non-ASPCS fume hoods in 16 California climate zones. Region 13 Region 14 Region 15 Region 16 With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS With ASPCS On-Peak Demand (kw) Off-Peak Demand (kw) Mid-Peak Demand (kw) Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $13,647 $29,314 $13,037 $28,232 $13,748 $29,319 $13,936 $29,979 COST PER CFM PER YEAR $6.96 $6.65 $7.01 $7.11 Annual kwh usage 87, ,631 86, ,361 95, ,721 85, ,830 On-Peak Demand (kw) Off-Peak Demand (kw) Mid-Peak Demand (kw) Southern California Edison Page 4 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

9 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET 06.05ET INTRODUCTION This energy efficiency study was undertaken to determine the demand reduction and energy savings of fume hoods with and without automated sash positioning control systems (ASPCS). All fume hoods were vertical sash configurations with variable air volume (VAV) systems. Amgen, a large biotechnology firm headquartered in Thousand Oaks, operates 651 fume hoods, including bench top and walk-in systems. Three hundred fifty-one run on VAV, of which 150 have vertical sash and can be readily retrofitted with ASPCS. The fume hood market is large and homogenous and not sector dependent, according to Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories, with at least 85,000 operating in California. For this reason, it offers exceptional opportunities for energy and demand savings. FUME HOOD OPERATION AND COMPONENT BREAKDOWN A fume hood is a partially enclosed laboratory workspace designed to capture toxic, irritating or unpleasant vapors and gases before they enter the breathing zone. A negative pressure is maintained inside the hood to prevent toxic substances from escaping the hood. A bench top fume hood with an automated sash positioning control system is shown in Figure 1. A typical fume hood has these main components: A hood body, or the visible part of the chemical hood, which contains gases and vapors. Baffles or moveable partitions in the hood body which control airflow and keep it uniform across the hood opening. The sash, or sliding door to the hood, is positioned to maximize capture of airflow contaminants when the system is in use. With an automated sash positioning control system (ASPCS), the sash is lowered to a minimum or closed when no one is working in the fume hood area of the lab bench. An airfoil, located along the bottom and side edges of the fume hood, streamlines airflow into the hood to prevent vapors from escaping. Work surface Exhaust plenum helps evenly distribute airflow across the hood face. TYPICAL ASPCS COMPONENTS A typical automated sash positioning control system has the following components: Infrared sensor is used to detect the presence of a user in the vicinity of the hood. Auto/Manual Selector Switch enables a user to manually override the automatic sash control system. Southern California Edison Page 5 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

10 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET 06.05ET Two manual push buttons are used to set the height of the sash. On walk-in style hoods, there is a floor level lower limit switch which detects if an object is obstructing the path of the sash. IR Presence sensor Auto/Manual Selector Switch (2)Manual Push Buttons Lower limit switch location for walk in hood style FIGURE 1. FUME HOOD WITH AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM. AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM An automated sash positioning control system (ASPCS) is a device that opens and closes a fume hood sash when it detects that personnel are present. Each hood has an auto/manual selector switch and two manual push buttons as shown in Figure 2. The system uses a cable cylinder to move the sash up to an open or down to a closed position, as shown in Figure 3. Air lines activate the cable/pulley system as shown in Figure 4. The system also has an IR eye and reflector for object detection. (Figure 5) Southern California Edison Page 6 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

11 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET 06.05ET Auto/Manual Switch Manual Push Buttons FIGURE 2. A USER CAN SWITCH TO MANUAL MODE AND USE THE PUSH BUTTONS TO RAISE AND LOWER THE FUME HOOD SASH. Cable/Pulley System Pressure Regulator FIGURE 3. THE CABLE/PULLEY SYSTEM ON TOP OF EACH FUME HOOD IS USED TO OPEN AND CLOSE THE SASH TO THE CORRECT, PREDETERMINED HEIGHT. FIGURE 4. PRESSURE REGULATOR AND TYPICAL TIE IN TO EXISTING AIR LINES ON TOP OF EACH FUME HOOD WITH TO ACTIVATE CABLE/PULLEY SYSTEM SHOWN IN FIGURE 3. Southern California Edison Page 7 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

12 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET IR Sensor for object detection FIGURE 5. THE INFRARED SENSOR PREVENTS THE SASH FROM CLOSING ON ANY OBJECTS WITHIN THE SLIDING TRACK. As a worker approaches a sash hood, the IR sensor opens the sash to a preset height. This allows the user to have hands free operation. When the user leaves the hood, the ASPCS closes the sash with a pre-selected time delay of 30 seconds. If an object is detected during the sash decent, the limit switch stops the sash without touching the obstruction. After 30 minutes, the ASPCS can be set to turn off lights inside the hood. An additional feature of the ASPCS is operation of the sash can be automatic or manual. Utility requirements for ASPCS are 120 V AC power and 20 psi of clean air with regulator. AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM AND ENERGY CONSERVATION According to a recent Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories study of fume hood usage, personnel are only in front of a hood 9% of the time. This means the majority of the time, hoods are left unattended and are not in use. Unless users close the sash hood, the variable air volume (VAV) exhaust valves have to remain % open to be in compliance with Cal OSHA s face velocity requirements. For an eight foot wide hood, the exhaust can reach cfm with the sash in the open position. Using the ASPCS, when a user walks away from the sash hood, the hood automatically closes and the exhaust air is reduced from cfm to cfm. The savings are a difference of cfm per hood, with a corresponding reduction in kwh usage and energy demand from the central plant. Note that fume hoods must employ variable air volume systems and have vertical sashes in order to yield energy savings with an automated sash positioning control system. Southern California Edison Page 8 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

13 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET IMPORTANCE OF ENERGY USAGE AND CONSERVATION TO AMGEN As a result of rapid growth over the past few years, Amgen Inc. is very concerned about the capacity of their central plant systems to meet the energy needs within its campus. Consequently it has instituted an energy conservation policy to reduce energy usage of HVAC, gas, steam, chilled water, and electricity, whenever possible. Amgen hopes to prevent the need for additional utility construction. Also, by conserving energy, Amgen has proven to create a safer working environment as required by the National Fire Protection Agency. The National Fire Protection Agency has the following standards which must be met regarding Fume/Chemical Exhaust Hoods: NFPA Standard Laboratory Hood Sash Closure: Laboratory hood sashes shall be kept closed whenever possible. When a fume hood is unattended, its sash shall remain fully closed. NFPA Standard 45A Users should be instructed and periodically reminded not to open sashes rapidly and to allow hood sashes to be open only when needed and only as much as necessary. MONITORING AND DATA COLLECTION During the first test, 12 sash hoods were monitored. Six hoods had automated sash positioning control systems. Of these six, three were walk-in hoods and three were modified bench top hoods -- Three walk-in hoods and three bench top hoods were also selected for the non ASPCS comparison. All hoods were 8 feet wide. This data set was collected over a 14 day period, 24 hours a day, and in 30 minute increments from Amgen s Building Maintenance System (BMS). The data was converted from bitmap files to Excel spreadsheets by an independent company to determine average flow rates in cfm of each hood and sash position. During test data set #2, data was also collected over a 14-day period, 24 hours a day, but the time intervals for collection were reduced to 15 minutes, which was deemed to be a more representative timeframe for testing. The Pi historian program was used to convert data from BMS to excel spreadsheets. DATA TEST #1 As described, the data from Test #1 was inaccurate due to obstructions. It is provided for reference in Appendix A. Southern California Edison Page 9 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

14 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET DATA TEST #2 Table 3 compares another fume hood pair -- with and without ASPCS -- over the same time period between peak and off-peak as in Test 1. An average exhaust rate was extracted daily for each time period over the 14 day test period. Whole day average is the total duration of 14 days, 24 hours per day in 15 min. increments as seen in Table 3. Sash position was monitored when hoods were in use and not in use for 2 weeks to establish a baseline load profile. There is a solid baseline at 300 cfm for all ASPCS hoods compared to a baseline at 850 cfm for hoods without ASPCS. As users close the non ASPCS hoods the required cfm drops below the base line of approximately 850 cfm and reduces down to cfm. Figure 6 represents exhaust rate (cfm) along the Y-axis and all data points in 15 minute increments over the 14 day test period in the X-axis. Exhaust Valve (EV)- 4120_6 operates on a fume hood without an automated sash positioning control system as shown in Figure 6 as a blue line. EV-4250_4 operates on a fume hood with an automated sash positioning control system as shown in Figure 6 as a purple line.. There is a visible 500 cfm difference between the ASPCS with and without controls. TABLE 3. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS. VALVE # WALK-IN Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4120_6 EV4250_ FIGURE 6. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS. Southern California Edison Page 10 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

15 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET DISCUSSION TEST 1 RESULTS The results of the data set were unreliable and were not considered in this discussion. Additional discussion can be found in the Appendix. RESULTS TEST 2 Before trending the data for Test 2, Amgen made minor repairs to existing ASPCS hoods. The lower limit switch was reattached and buckets were moved outside the lower sash for the limit switches to make contact. Daily walks through the laboratories were instituted on both ground and second floors to verify all ASPCS hoods were operational and hoods without ASPCS were not intentionally closed to conserve energy. Table 4 shows a comparison of two hoods, EV (without ASPCS) and EV (with ASPCS). For this set of data (Table 4 and 7), users were partially closing the hoods without ASPCS. As a result average flow rates of between 625 and 560 cfm were observed with the control system (without ASPCS).. When users were not closing the sash (Tables 5, 6 and 8), the average exhaust (without ASPCS) increased to cfm. For all hood with ASPCS, based on data collected, the average exhaust is about 300 cfm as described in Tables 4-8 and Figures TABLE 4. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS. VALVE # WALK-IN Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4180_4 EV4280_ FIGURE 7. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS. Southern California Edison Page 11 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

16 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET TABLE 5. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM VALVE # WALK-IN Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4210_6 EV4220_ FIGURE 8. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS. Southern California Edison Page 12 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

17 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET TABLE 6. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WITHOUT ASPCS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS Valve # Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4120_6 EV4250_ FIGURE 9. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS. Southern California Edison Page 13 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

18 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET TABLE 7. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WITHOUT ASPCS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS Valve # Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4180_4 EV4280_ FIGURE 10. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WITHOUT ASPCS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS. Southern California Edison Page 14 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

19 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET TABLE 8. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT ASPCS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS. VALVE # WALK-IN Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4120_4 EV4280_ FIGURE 11. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WITHOUT ASPCS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS. Figures 12 through 17 provide a 24-hour exhaust profile with and without ASPCS over an entire week with Saturday data as representative of Sunday's profile. Southern California Edison Page 15 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

20 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET Monday 24-Hour Exhaust Profile with ASPS w/o ASPS Air Flow (CFM) :00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 Time FIGURE 12. MONDAY 24-HOUR EXHAUST PROFILE FOR VALVES & Tuesday 24-Hour Exhaust Profile with ASPS w/o ASPS Air Flow (CFM) :00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 Time FIGURE 13. TUESDAY 24 HOUR EXHAUST PROFILE Southern California Edison Page 16 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

21 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET Wednesday 24-Hour Exhaust Profile with ASPS w/o ASPS Air Flow (CFM) :00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 Time FIGURE 14. WEDNESDAY 24 HOUR EXHAUST PROFILE Thursday 24-Hour Exhaust Profile with ASPS w/o ASPS Air Flow (CFM) :00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 Time FIGURE 15. THURSDAY 24 HOUR EXHAUST PROFILE Southern California Edison Page 17 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

22 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET Friday 24-Hour Exhaust Profile with ASPS w/o ASPS Air Flow (CFM) :00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 Time FIGURE 16. FRIDAY 24 HOUR EXHAUST PROFILE Saterday 24-Hour Exhaust Profile with ASPS w/o ASPS Air Flow (CFM) :00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 Time FIGURE 17. SATURDAY 24-HOUR EXHAUST PROFILE. The 26 California Climate Zones are shown in Figure 18. Table 9 summarizes the cost per cfm as obtained by the Trace 700 program simulations of 16 climate zones throughout California. General time of use schedules were used for on-peak, mid-peak, and off-peak periods. Amgen s rate schedule was used to generate annual energy costs evaluating all six hoods with ASPCS and six without ASPCS controls. Southern California Edison Page 18 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

23 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET FIGURE 18. CALIFORNIA BUILDING CLIMATE ZONES. Southern California Edison Page 19 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

24 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET TABLE 9. COST PER CFM FOR 16 CALIFORNIA CLIMATE ZONES Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Without With Without With Without With ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $13,324 $30,649 $12,102 $28,256 $11,360 $26,481 $12,411 $27,024 Air Flow (CFM) Cost per CFM $6.79 $6.17 $5.79 $6.33 Annual kwh 79, ,290 78, ,158 76, ,000 81, ,208 Annual energy savings $17,325 (101,933 Kwh) $16,154 (103,958Kwh) $15,121 (100,891 Kwh) $14,613 (97,459 Kwh) Region 5 Region 6 Region 7 Region 8 Without With Without With Without With ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS With ASPCS Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $11,590 $27,039 $11,513 $28,435 $12,138 $28,169 $12,689 $26,869 Air Flow (CFM) Cost per CFM $5.91 $5.87 $6.19 $6.47 Annual kwh 76, ,007 78, ,435 85, ,081 86, ,313 Annual energy savings $15,449 (101,494 Kwh) With ASPCS $16,922 (118,438 Kwh) $16,031 (113,641 Kwh) $14,180 (98,216 Kwh) Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Region 12 Without With Without With Without With ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $12,152 $27,258 $12,835 $29,557 $12,562 $29,414 $12,228 $28,533 Air Flow (CFM) Cost per CFM $6.20 $6.55 $6.41 $6.29 Annual kwh 82, ,017 85, ,715 82, ,096 79, ,982 Annual energy savings $15,106 (102,872 Kwh) With ASPCS $16,722 (112,323 Kwh) $16,852 (109,938 Kwh) $16,305 (104,932 Kwh) Region 13 Region 14 Region 15 Region16 Without With Without With Without With ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS ASPCS Without ASPCS Annual Energy Cost $13,647 $29,314 $13,037 $28,232 $13,748 $29,319 $13,936 $29,979 Air Flow (CFM) Cost per CFM $6.96 $6.65 $7.01 $7.11 Annual kwh 87, ,631 86, ,361 95, ,721 85, ,830 Annual energy savings $15,667 (101,753 Kwh) $15,195 (101,411 Kwh) $15,571 (104,970 Kwh) $16,043 (98,647 Kwh) Southern California Edison Page 20 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

25 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET CONCLUSIONS Table 10 shows the annual energy costs, air flows with ASPCS and without ASPCS fume hoods and the costs per cfm per year. With the ASPCS, the annual utility savings will result in an approximate 2 year pay back period. The annual cost savings with ASPCS can be directly applied to the utility plant equipment. With the installation of the ASPCS, energy usage for the water chiller, chilled water pump, cooling tower, cooling tower pump, boiler, and hot water pump will also be significantly reduced. TABLE 10. AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM (ASPCS) SAVINGS PER 1000 CFM With ASPCS Without ASPCS Daily Averages (cfm) Sum Daily averages (cfm) From TRACE program: Annual Electric Cost: $11,425 $25,898 Annual Gas Cost: $727 $1,360 Total Annual Utility Cost $12,152 $27,258 Electric Cost per cfm/yr $5.83 $5.60 Cost per 1000 cfm/yr $5,829 $5,603 Gas Cost per cfm/yr $0.37 $0.29 Cost per 1000 cfm/yr $371 $294 Total Cost per cfm/yr $6.20 $5.89 Total Cost per 1000 cfm/yr $6,199 $5,893 Cost Benefit Ratio based total annual utility costs From the above annual utility costs $27,258-$12,152 = $15,106 The cost to install ASPCS per fume hood is $4,500 For six fume hoods the installation costs is $4500 x 6 units = $27,000 $27,000/$15,106 = 1.79 yrs Simple Payback Period 1.79 yrs Southern California Edison Page 21 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

26 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET Similarly, with the reduction in air usage, the amount of chilled water and pre-heated hot water used by the air handling systems is reduced, as well. The air handling unit(s) will work at a reduced capacity. The savings for the air handling unit(s) will be a significant reduction in utility costs at the Central Plant. Future laboratory buildings will require fewer water chillers, smaller cooling towers, and less boiler capacity. The excessive exhaust data results shown in Test 1 were not used in the data evaluation, but were critical in determining the maximum potential in cfm differences between the ASPCS and non ASPCS hoods. For example, objects can obstruct the sash from closing. Figure 19 shows chemical buckets and other obstructions that kept the lower limit switch from making contact and caused the upper sash to remain in the full open position. In this case, users were operating in manual mode leaving the upper sash partially or fully open. Figures 20 shows how obstructions were corrected by lengthening hoses and moving chemical buckets outside the lower sash. In this instance, the ASPCS could now work properly without user assistance. FIGURE 19. CHEMICAL BUCKETS AND OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS KEEP LOWER LIMIT SWITCH FROM MAKING CONTACT Southern California Edison Page 22 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

27 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET Photo #10 FIGURE 20. CORRECTING OBSTRUCTIONS BY LENGTHENING HOSES AND MOVING CHEMICAL BUCKETS OUTSIDE ASPCS CAN NOW WORK PROPERLY WITHOUT USER ASSISTANCE. LOWER SASH. To help prevent obstructions from occurring and to remind users of a sash warning zone, a strip of 6-inch caution tape inside the sash hood would eliminate the potential for future obstructions of the sash. An alternative building could have been used to study the non ASPCS hoods. Normal fume hoods are left 100% open for a 24-hour day. The environment near the ASPCS hoods with personnel was very difficult to change once non ASPCS hoods were partially closed after use. Southern California Edison Page 23 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

28 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET RECOMMENDATIONS There is a definite need to install ASPCS on all hoods with variable air volumes at Amgen. Specifically for Amgen, Inc., Climate Zone 9, the cost savings are $6.20 per cfm per year per hood. For each hood that is retrofitted with the ASPCS, a minimum difference of cfm is realized. The cost per cfm per yr in Table 13 shows that the 16 different climate zones only ranged from $5.79 per cfm per yr. to $7.11 per cfm per yr. OPTIONS FOR DETERMINING INCENTIVE REBATES SCE has three options to consider in determining incentive rebates for reducing utility costs: Option #1, rebate 50% of the initial installation cost of the ASPCS or base rebates on annual cost savings from feasibility studies. For this study, 50% of the installation cost would be $13,500 from Table 14. Option #2, match the annual kwh savings of $14,473 for the six ASPCS installed as shown in Table 14. (up to maximum of 50% installed cost) Option #3, base a rebate on kwh savings. For Amgen, in region 9, the kwh annual usage is 185,017 kwh without ASPCS and 82,145 kwh with ASPCS. The kwh saving difference is 102,872 kwh multiplied by a rebate factor of ($0.08/kWh) which results in $8,230 for six ASPCS hoods or $1,372 for each ASPCS installed. An incentive program from SCE would reduce Amgen s simple payback period from 1.79 years to 0.94 years for options 1 and 2, 1.15 years for option 3. Southern California Edison Page 24 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

29 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET APPENDIX A Table A-1 compares a ASPCS walk-in hood and a non ASPCS walk-in hood. The off-peak period was from midnight to 6:00 a.m. The on-peak period was from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.. Mid-Peak period was from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. to midnight. An average exhaust rate was extracted daily for each time period during the 14 day test. The whole day average is the total duration of 14 days, 24 hours per day in 30 minute increments as shown in Appendix A. The remaining tables and graphs compare 5 ASPCS and five non-aspcs hoods, as shown in the appendix material. In Figure A-1, the Y axis represents exhaust cfm data points. In the X axis, all the data points are graphed in 30-minute increments over the 14-day test period. EV measures the exhaust cfm without an automated sash positioning control system and EV measures the exhaust cfm with ASPCS. Minor problems with first test data produced unreliable results and minimal cfm difference between both hoods. Between the two hoods, it is not obvious which hood had the ASPCS installed. Southern California Edison Page 25 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

30 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALUES (WALK-IN FUME HOOD WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROL) AND (WALK-IN FUME HOOD WITH SASH CONTROL) In the ASPCS hood, the lower limit switch was knocked off the sash and did not make contact. The glass was cracked and the hood was manually closed by the users (425 cfm avg). Because of these problems, only a 90 cfm difference was observed between the ASPCS (515 cfm avg) and non ASPCS (425 cfm avg). Results are provided in Table A-2 and Figure A-2. TABLE A-1. COMPARISON OF CFMS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS VALVE # WALK-IN Without ASPCS With ASPCS Time Period (cfm) (cfm) CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4150_4 EV4250_ FIGURE A-1. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVE WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROLS AND EXHAUST VALVE Southern California Edison Page 26 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

31 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALUES EV (MODIFIED BENCH-TOP FUME HOOD WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH CONTROL) AND EV (MODIFIED BENCH-TOP FUME HOOD WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROL) There was a 350 cfm difference between the non-aspcs and the ASPCS fume hood as shown in Table A-2 and Figure A-2. The ASPCS installed hood was working properly (304 cfm avg.), but the users were partially closing the non ASPCS hood (654 cfm avg.) as a result of a visible campaign sign to conserve energy (Figure A- 4). TABLE A-2. COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS FOR EXHAUST VALVES & VALVE # BENCHTOP Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg FIGURE A-3. AMGEN S AWARENESS CAMPAIGN TO CONSERVE ENERGY. THIS SIGNAGE WAS APPLIED TO ALL VAV HOODS. Southern California Edison Page 27 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

32 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALUES EV (MODIFIED BENCH-TOP FUME HOOD WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM) AND EV (MODIFIED BENCH-TOP FUME HOOD WITH AUTOMATED SASH CONTROL) A comparison between these non-aspcs and ASPCS modified benchtop hoods yielded a 283 cfm difference between the hoods as shown in Table A-4 and Figure A- 4. Results were very similar to the results in Table 1. The ASPCS installed hood was working properly (294 cfm avg.), but the users were again partially closing the non ASPCS hoods (577 cfm avg.). TABLE A-3. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WITHOUT ASPCS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS VALVE # BENCHTOP Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4250_6 EV4150_ FIGURE A-4. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WITHOUT ASPCS AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS The ASPCS hood was working correctly, but there was an empty bottle obstruction restricting the sash from fully closing (407 cfm avg).as shown in Figure A-5. Both hoods have comparable cfm usage with a 118-cfm difference in usage as shown in Figure A-5. The non-aspcs hood also has lower readings (524 cfm) due to users partially closing the sash. Southern California Edison Page 28 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

33 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET FIGURE A-5. ASPCS HOOD WITH EMPTY BOTTLE OBSTRUCTION CAUSING EXCESSIVE EXHAUST USAGE. Southern California Edison Page 29 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

34 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES EV (WALK IN FUME HOOD WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM) AND EV (WALK IN FUME HOOD WITH AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM) A comparison of these two hoods shown in Table A-5 and Figure A-7 gives a negative difference in cfm readings. An ASPCS hood as a rule uses less exhaust than a non- ASPCS hood. Because the lower limit switch did not make contact with the ASPCS hood, the upper sash remained open during data testing, resulting in an error reading of -301 cfm avg. The ASPCS hood used 685 cfm avg exhaust while again the non-aspcs hood was partially close showing only 384 cfm avg exhaust. TABLE A-.5 COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WALK-IN FUME HOOD WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM. VALVE # WALK-IN Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg EV4220_6 EV4210_ FIGURE A-7. COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES WALK-IN FUME HOOD WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM AND EXHAUST VALVE WITH AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM. Southern California Edison Page 30 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

35 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET COMPARISON OF EXHAUST VALVES EV (WALK-IN HOOD WITHOUT AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM) AND EV (WALK-IN FUME HOOD WITH AUTOMATED SASH POSITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM) Table A-6 and Figure A-8 compare walk-in hoods EV (without ASPCS) and (with ASPCS). The non-aspcs hood was partially opened with the light turned off (480 cfm average) instead of fully opened. We believe that the hood was rarely in use. Because of this error, data was used from a replacement walk-in hood as observed in test data #2. The ASPCS hood was working correctly in that case and was in use (352 cfm average). The resulting difference between the two hoods was 136 cfm average. The results from the first data set was reviewed by Amgen, SCE representatives, and Harris Group Engineers. The group recommended that a second data set be collected to study the potential savings of the ASPCS with increased accuracy. During teleconferences involving SCE, Amgen, and Harris Group, shorter time intervals for readings were agreed to on the hood positions. The appendix has print outs of the six ASPCS hoods with 5-minute increments. There were no appreciable differences in average cfm usage when compared to 30 minute increments. Because of this, for the second set of data, the increments were reviewed at 15 minute intervals. TABLE A-6. COMPARISON OF WALK-IN FUME HOOD EXHAUST VALVE WITH WALK-IN FUME HOOD EXHAUST VALVE WITH ASPCS VALVE # WALK-IN Time Period CFM Without ASPCS CFM With ASPCS CFM Difference Off-Peak On-Peak Mid-Peak Whole Day Avg Southern California Edison Page 31 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

36 Fume Hood Automated Sash Control Positioning Systems ET EV4180_4 EV4280_ FIGURE A-8 VALVES & TESTS Southern California Edison Page 32 Design & Engineering Services July 2007

37 ATTACHMENT 1 Monthly Energy Consumption and Monthly Utility Costs for 16 Climate Zones Alternative 1 - ASPS Alternative 2 - non ASPS

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102 ATTACHMENT 2 Trace 700 System Summary for Region 9 With ASPS

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138 ATTACHMENT 3 Trace 700 System Load Profiles for Region 9 With ASPS

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159 ATTACHMENT 4 Trace 700 System Summary for Region 9 Without ASPS

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195 ATTACHMENT 5 Trace 700 System Load Profiles for Region 9 Without ASPS

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216 ATTACHMENT 6 (12) Hood sash data from March 26, 2007 through April 9, 2007 in 15 minute increments.

217 EV4120_4 EV4120_4 EV4120_6 EV4120_6 EV4150_4 EV4150_4 EV4150_6 EV4150_6 EV4180_4 EV4180_4 EV4180_6 EV4180_6 EV4210_6 3/26/07 12:00 AM /26/07 12:15 AM /26/07 12:30 AM /26/07 12:45 AM /26/07 1:00 AM /26/07 1:15 AM /26/07 1:30 AM /26/07 1:45 AM /26/07 2:00 AM /26/07 2:15 AM /26/07 2:30 AM /26/07 2:45 AM /26/07 3:00 AM /26/07 3:15 AM /26/07 3:30 AM /26/07 3:45 AM /26/07 4:00 AM /26/07 4:15 AM /26/07 4:30 AM /26/07 4:45 AM /26/07 5:00 AM /26/07 5:15 AM /26/07 5:30 AM /26/07 5:45 AM /26/07 6:00 AM /26/07 6:15 AM /26/07 6:30 AM /26/07 6:45 AM /26/07 7:00 AM /26/07 7:15 AM /26/07 7:30 AM /26/07 7:45 AM /26/07 8:00 AM /26/07 8:15 AM /26/07 8:30 AM /26/07 8:45 AM /26/07 9:00 AM /26/07 9:15 AM /26/07 9:30 AM /26/07 9:45 AM /26/07 10:00 AM /26/07 10:15 AM /26/07 10:30 AM /26/07 10:45 AM /26/07 11:00 AM /26/07 11:15 AM /26/07 11:30 AM /26/07 11:45 AM /26/07 12:00 PM /26/07 12:15 PM /26/07 12:30 PM /26/07 12:45 PM /26/07 1:00 PM /26/07 1:15 PM /26/07 1:30 PM /26/07 1:45 PM /26/07 2:00 PM /26/07 2:15 PM /26/07 2:30 PM EV4210_6 EV4220_4 EV4220_4 EV4220_6 EV4220_6 EV4250_4 EV4250_4 EV4250_6 EV4250_6 EV4280_4 EV4280_4 EV4280_6 EV4280_6