Greenwall Proposal "B"

Greenwall Proposal "B"
2. Active Living Walls
by Ashley, Veronica, Amy and David

Our research into the HVAC system of the Sharp Centre showed us how fresh air is brought indoors and that we do not need to open windows (or want them open because air from a window would throw off the HVAC's feedback sensors that monitor room temperature and humidity). So, if the IAQ is excellent, what is the problem?

Heating and Cooling outdoor air burns fossil fuels

In the winter, cold fresh air must be heated before it can go into the building, and in the summer it must be cooled. This levelling of the outdoor air temperature to comfortable room temperature is carbon-intensive as well as costly, especially when one considers that the indoor air is refreshed several times per hour. To do this job the building's heating bill and eco-footprint must be enormous.

Thus! Our problem changed from a concern about IAQ to one of reducing the building's eco-footprint.


Active Living Walls: Let's make our own fresh air!
Greenwalls, or more precisely, "Active Living Walls" as patented by Nedlaw, the company that designed the Koffler Institute wall that I saw (above), are alternative sources of fresh air that replace outdoor air ventilation, and because the air stays indoors the HVAC doesn't need to heat or cool it as much, if at all. A Living Wall is a microcosm of the ecology of the world outside that replicates indoors what happens outdoors, namely those processes that generate the fresh air we breathe. How it works is that the air inside a building is pulled through the living wall where microbes (bacteria) thrive in a continuously moving film of water and as air meets water the microbes breakdown any contaminants like VOC's in the air before the HVAC recirculates the fresh air back into the (closed) loop. So, there you have it, people, fresh air all year long without heating or cooling it to the extent that we do now.

Ideal Location

Where is the most effective location for a living wall at OCAD? Right in your face as you walk through the doors! When you look up, there are walls that go up forever right up to the roof. Putting living walls left, right and centre would not get in anybody's way; and if that weren't enough, these walls face windows that bombard them with natural light all day long.


To prove my point, look at how well this little guy is doing!


Cost
Nedlaw told me that the Koffler wall cost about $35K to install. My own quick and rough calculation is that a wall the size of our proposal would be...let us say, several times more than that! Though I imagine it would pay for itself very quickly, the daunting startup cost is why we finally went with Proposal "A", The Green Screen. However...

Opportunity knocks: The Bandwagon is coming!

Toronto to Host 2009 International Green Roof Congress

1000's of people will attend:
Architects
Landscape architects
Engineers
Roofing Professionals
Policy Makers
NGOs
Academics
Manufacturers
Contractors

And when one looks at who is on the advisory committee, who can doubt that green infrastructure is becoming mainstream:

• Brian Denney, CAO, Toronto Regional Conservation Authority (TRCA)
• Marian Fraser, President, Fraser & Company
• Eva Ligeti, Executive Director, Clean Air Partnership
• Peter Love, Chief Conservation Officer, Ontario Power Authority
• Gord Miller, Environmental Commissioner of Ontario
• Ken Ogilvie, Executive Director Emeritus, Pollution Probe
• David O'Brien, President & CEO, Toronto Hydro
• Scott Pegg, Environmental Policy Group, Ontario Ministry of Energy & Infrastructure
• Anastasios (Tas) Venetsanopoulos, VP Research & Innovation, Ryerson University Toronto
• Scott Wylie, President, Wytech Building Envelope Solutions / Chair, GRHC Ontario Chapter

Conclusion
It's a no brainer that our Greenwall Proposal "B" while expensive is not far fetched but is in fact very much in touch with the zeitgeist, and as such, if we proposed this next year funding would be thrown at our living wall from all directions. Then OCAD would be renowned not only for the hip Sharp Centre but also for our Living (and breathing) Wall.


note:
I wasn't going to blog this since our group went with Proposal "A", but doing the presentation this morning put a spur into me blogspot.

solar energy follow up, images + website

This is the follow up blog post from aleks, haomin, kaylyn and sarah


Here is an image of the solar panels currently in place at the horse palace, you can view their performance here: http://view2.fatspaniel.net/FST/Portal/TorontoHorsePalace/

Solar energy model!

This shows how the solar panels would look on the roof of OCAD, facing south (to get the most sunlight) at a 45 degree angle.

Made by me, Sarah. :)

aleks, haomin, kaylyn, sarah - Taking Action on Renewable Energy

Group Members: aleks, haomin, kaylyn, sarah

Proposal:

Installation of Solar panels on the flat rooftop of the tabletop structure above the OCAD’s main building.

Purpose:

Allow OCAD contribute to environmental sustainability, by switching part of OCAD’s energy use to a more “green” source. Usage of solar energy will reduce OCAD’s Carbon footprint, and overall emission of toxic chemicals into the environment by other non-renewable energy sources.

What’s been done?

OCAD’s current step toward a “greener” source of energy use was to enter into the bullfrog system for the student union building. This system allows part of OCAD to be powered by a “green” source for an increased fee on electricity.

We, however, whish to push this initiative into the next step, by having OCAD become part of the “green” source of electricity. By introducing this system of solar energy into the open grid hydro system, we not only produce electricity for ourselves, but also any extra electricity gets to be inputted into Ontario’s hydro grid.

Technical information:

Structural requirements:

The rooftop of OCAD’s tabletop structure measures approximately 83 meters by 31 meters, which translates into approximately 2500 square meters of area available. We propose to use half of that area, which is about 1250 square meters or approximately 14000 square foot of available space for installing the solar panels.

There should be no additional strain to the building from the extra weight, as the original architect that designed the Sharp Center had proposed that prefabricated student pub or lecture hall can be hung from the tabletop. Thus, the extra weight shouldn’t pose any problems.

The solar panels needs to be south facing, and inclined at about 45° angle. The Sharp Center is completely unobstructed from the south side, making it perfect for the solar panels.

Technology:

We decided to do a comparison study between what we are proposing and another case study that was done at the Horse Palace at the Exhibition place, in late 2006. Their solar panels covered approximately 15000 square feet of area, which is similar to the area we r proposing to cover on OCAD’s rooftop. They chose between two systems, a 50kw system and a 100kw system, which will produce 120,000 kWh of electricity per year. In the end, they decided to opt for the 100kw system, as it was a lot more cost efficient to install.

We propose to do the same, and install the 100kw system at OCAD. Also, because Carmanah Technologies had done a system of this scale for the case study, it would be a lot more efficient to use the same company, as they have the experience to create a smooth operation.

Budgeting and Incentives:

The costs for solar panels are according to the energy produced by the system. To create a 100kw system costs about $1.1 million (where as the 50kw system require about $750,000, about $15,000 per kw) averaging about $11,000 per kw.

From our research, we understand that OCAD’s sustainability taskforce only has about $518,000 in their budget. However, the government gives many incentives toward those that wish to build systems of energy production based on sustainable sources. The case study at the Exhibition Place built their system primarily based on government incentives. They received a grant of $250,000 from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and a grant of $250,000 from the Toronto Atmospheric Fund. In addition, they were also able to apply for a $600,000 interest free loan from the Better Buildings Partnership.

We understand that we might not receive the same type of grants from the government, because the case study was a pilot program. However, the existence of these grants and loans will be able to make the project feasible. As well, the government also has another incentive – for every kilowatt-hour produced by the renewable system, the government will pay back 42 cents, thus allowing the system to pay for itself in about 22 years.