EPA-450/3-76-012-b
September 1976
GROWTH EFFECTS OF MAJOR
LAND USE PROJECTS:
VOLUME II - COMPILATION
OF LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
EPA-450/3-76-012-b
GROWTH EFFECTS OF MAJOR
LAND USE PROJECTS
VOLUME II - COMPILATION
OF LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS
by
Frank Hencsh
Waldi'ii Research Division of Abcor
201 Vussur Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139.
Contract No. 68-02-2076
EPA Project Officer: Thomas McCurdy
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
September 1976
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies permit - from the
Air Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for a fee,
from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Walden Research Division of Abcor, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139,
in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-02-2076. The contents of this report
are reproduced herein as received from Walden Research Division of
Abcor. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those
of the author and not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection
Agency. Mention of company or product names is not to be considered
as an endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. EPA-450/3-76-012-b
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Title Page
I INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH ; 1-1
A. Introduction 1-1
B. Organization 1-2
C. Approach to Land Use Based Emission Factors ... 1-2
1. Emission Factor Structure 1-4
D. Variance of Energy Requirement, Efficiency, and
Emission Factors 1-6
1. Energy Requirement 1-6
2. Efficiency of Utilization 1-9
II SUMMARY OF LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS 2-1
III DEVELOPMENT OF EMISSION FACTORS 3-1
A. Residential 3-1
1. Single Family Residential 3-1
2. Single Family Attached Dwelling Units . . . .3-12
3. Mobile Home Dwelling Units 3-12
4. Multifamily Low Rise Residential 3-12
5. High Rise Multifamily Residential 3-20
B. Commercial - Institutional 3-29
1. Retail Establishments 3-29
2. Office Buildings 3-33
3. Warehouse and Wholesaling Establishments . . 3-36
4. Hotels, Motels and Dormitories and Clubs . . 3-38
5. Hospitals 3-39
6. Cultural Buildings 3-42
7. Churches 3-43
8. Schools . . 3-49
IV GENERATION OF LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS .... 4-1
V REFERENCES 5-1
APPENDIX A - Calculation of Residential Air
Conditioner Operating Hours A-l
APPENDIX B - Regression Analysis of Building Owner's
and Managers Association (BOMA) Sample . B-l
APPENDIX C - Regression Analysis of Electric Heating
Association (EHA) Sample C-l
iii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Title Page
2-1 TYPICAL EMISSION FACTORS FOR ELECTRIC UTILITIES . . 2-2
2-2 SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS 2-3
2-3 MOBILE HOME, RESIDENTIAL* LAND USE BASED EMISSION
FACTORS 2-4
2-4 RESIDENTIAL, LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY, LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS 2-5
2-5 HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS 2-6
2-6 RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, WAREHOUSES, WHOLESALING
ESTABLISHMENTS, LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS . . 2-7
2-7 OFFICE BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS . . 2-8
2-8 NONHOUSEKEL-PING, RESIDENTIAL, LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS 2-9
2-9 HOSPITAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS 2-10
2-10 CULTURAL BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS . 2-11
2-11 CHURCH BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS . . 2-12
2-12 SCHOOL BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS . . 2-13
2-13 ESTIMATED NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS BY TWO DIGIT 1967 STANDARD
INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE 2-14
2-14 RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY, LAND USE BASED EMISSION
FACTORS (SI UNITS) 2-15
2-15 RESIDENTIAL, MOBILE HOME LAND USE BASED EMISSION
FACTORS (SI UNITS) 2-16
2-16 RESIDENTIAL, LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS) 2-17
2-17 RESIDENTIAL, HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS) 2-18
2-18 RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, WAREHOUSES, WHOLESALING
ESTABLISHMENTS: LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
(SI UNITS) 2-19
2-19 OFFICE BUILDINGS, LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
(SI UNITS) 2-20
2-20 RESIDENTIAL, NONHOUSEKEEPING, LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS) 2-21
TV
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Number Title Page
2-21 HOSPITAL, LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
(SI UNITS) 2-22
2-22 CULTURAL BUILDINGS LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
(SI UNITS) 2-23
2-23 CHURCH BUILDINGS LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
(SI UNITS) . 2-24
2-24 SCHOOL BUILDINGS LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
(SI UNITS) 2-25
2-25 ESTIMATED NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LAND USE BASED
EMISSION FACTORS BY TWO DIGIT 1967 STANDARD
INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE 2-26
3-T: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PARAMETERS 3-2
3-2 ENGINEERING ESTIMATES OF REGIONAL SPACE HEATING
AND AIR CONDITIONING ENERGY CONSUMPTION 3-3
3-3 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ENERGY
CONSUMPTION 3-13
3-4 MOBILE HOME ENERGY CONSUMPTION 3-14
3-5 FEA DESIGN PARAMETERS 3-15
3-6 FEA LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY ESTIMATES 3-16
3-7 COMPARISON OF RELEVANT FEA, EHA, AND HITTMAN DATA . 3-18
3-8 LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ENERGY
CONSUMPTION 3-21
3-9 FEA HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ESTIMATES .. 3-22
3-10 ELECTRIC ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR SPACE HEATING IN
18 APARTMENT BUILDINGS 3-24
3-11 HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION
FACTORS 3-28
3-12 FEA ESTIMATES OF RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS ENERGY
DEMAND 3-30
3-13 RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT ENERGY CONSUMPTION ...... 3-34
3-14 FEA ESTIMATE OF OFFICE BUILDING ENERGY DEMAND . . . 3-35
3-15 OFFICE BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION 3-37
3-16 NONHOUSEKEEPING RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION . . . 3-40
3-17 FEA ESTIMATES OF HOSPITAL ENERGY DEMAND 3-41
3-18 CULTURAL BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION 3-44
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Number Title Page
3-19 CHURCH BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION . . 3-44
3-20 FEA ESTIMATES OF SCHOOL BUILDING ENERGY DEMAND . . . 3.45
3-21 OTHER AVAILABLE DATA ON MEASURED ENERGY
CONSUMPTION IN SCHOOLS 3.47
3-22 SCHOOL BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION 3.43
. 3-23 ESTIMATED BUILDING FLOOR AREA PER EMPLOYEE BY TWO
DIGIT 1967 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE . 3-52
3-24 MEAN 1971 FUEL CONSUMPTION PER EMPLOYEE BY 1967
STANDARD' INDUSTRIAL CLASSFICATION CODE ....... 3-53
••^25 MEAN 197(1 FUEL CONSUMPTION FOR HEAT AND POWER PER
BUILDING FLOOR AREA, BY TWO DIGIT 1967 STANDARD
INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE . 3-54
3-26 INDUSTRIAL EMISSION FACTORS 3-55
4-1 SELECTED' EMISSION FACTORS, LBS PER BTU 4-2
4-2 ENERGY CONTENTS OF SELECTED FUELS 4-2
4-3 TYPICAL EMISSION FACTORS FOR ELECTRIC UTILITIES . .4-3
4-4 PERCENTAGE OF NATIONAL EMISSIONS LOADINGS BY SOURCE
CATEGORY 4-3
vi
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Title Page
1-1 NORMAL SEASONAL HEATING DEGREE DAYS (BASE 65°F)
1941-1970 1-7
1-2 NORMAL SEASONAL COOLING DEGREE DAYS (BASE 65°F)
1941-1970 1-10
1-3 ANNUAL AIR CONDITIONER COMPRESSOR OPERATING HOURS
FOR HOMES THAT ARE NOT NATURALLY VENTILATED ... 1-11
3-1 SCATTER DIAGRAM OF DEGREE DAYS (X-AXIS) AND
THERMS PER CUSTOMER (Y-AXIS) 3-6
3-2 ESTIMATES OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SPACE
HEATING ENERGY DEMAND BY FUEL TYPE 3-8
3-3 COMPILATION OF HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY HEATING
ESTIMATES 3-25
vii
-------
ABBREVIATIONS
A Ash percentage in fuel by weight
apt. apartment
Btu British thermal unit
cl.d.d. cooling degree day, Fahrenheit
cl.d.d.°K cooling degree day, Kelvin
cu.ft. cubic foot
d.d. degree day (either heating or cooling),
Fahrenheit
d.u. dwelling unit
ht.d.d. heating degree day, Fahrenheit
ht.d.d.°K heating degree day, Kelvin
j Joule
kg kilogram
kWh kilowatt-hour
lb. pound
M thousand
m^ square meter
op.hr. operating hour
S sulfur percentage in fuel, by weight
SIC Standard Industrial Classification
sq.ft. square foot (floor area)
yr. year
PM Particulate Matter
SO Sulfur Oxides
A
CO Carbon Monoxide
HC Hydrocarbons
NO Nitrogen Oxides
viii
-------
GLOSSARY OF SELECTED DEFINITIONS ENERGY CONVERSIONS
1 British Thermal Unit (BTU)
1 Therm
1 Kilowatt-hour (kWh)
1 ton of refrigeration
heating degree days
cooling .degree days
average daily temperature
= heat required to raise the temperature
of one pound of water by 1°F.
= 100,000 BTU
= 3,412 BTU
= 12,000 BTU per hour
= 65° F minus average daily temperature,
when average daily temperature is below
65°F.
= 65°F minus average daily temperature,
when average daily temperature is below
65°F.
= (daily high temperature + daily low
temperature) * 2
ENGLISH - SI CONVERSIONS
1 Degree-day°F
1 British Thermal Unit
1 Kilowatt-hour
1 Therm
1 ton of refrigeration
1 British Thermal Unit/hour
= 5/9 Degree day°C
= 1055.06 joules (J)
= 3.6*106 joules
= 1.0551*108 joules
= 3.5169*1O3 watts (W)
= 2.9308*101"1 watts
ix
-------
I. INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH
A. INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of the fifth and sixth phases of
a study of the Growth Effects of Major Land Use Projects (GEMLUP). The
principal objectives of the GEMLUP study are to formulate a methodology to
predict air pollutant emissions from:
• Two types of major land use developments: large concentrations
of employment such'as office or industrial parks and large
residential developments
• Secondary land development that is induced by the two types of
major land use development projects
• Motor vehicular traffic associated with bo$h the major project
and secondary development.
GEMLUP relates to a number of EPA programs, including air quality
maintenance plan (AQMP) development [1], environmental impact statement
(EIS) review [2], the indefinitely suspended portions of indirect source
review [3], and the prevention of significant air quality deterioration,
or nondegradation [4]. Explicit or implicit in these programs is an evalu-
ation of air quality impacts of land use plans or project developments.
GEMLUP is designed to formulate and test a method of evaluating land use
impacts at the project scale, and, in the process, develop a set of land
use based emission factors potentially useful at the regional scale.
The study was divided into six phases:
Phase 1 - Specification of a preliminary model and generation of
a list of data requirements
Phase 2 - Data collection
Phase 3 - Causal analysis of the land use model using path anal-
ysis
Phase 4 - Development of predictive equations for the land use
model and development of a traffic model
Phase 5 - Development of indices of fuel consumption
Phase 6 - Translation of fuel consumption indices into land use
based emission factors.
1-1
-------
This volume of the final report concerns itself with phases 5 and
6, i.e., the development of indices of fuel consumption in buildings and
the translation of those indices into land use based emission factors.
There are two additional volumes of the final report. Volume I
discusses phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3. Volume III contains the results
of phase 4, a summary of Volumes I and II, and a documentation of the appli-
cation of the models.
B. ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
The remainder of this introductory chapter discusses the general
approach to development of land use based emission factors. The following
chapter is a compilation of the land use based emission factors generated
in this study. Chapter III discusses in the development of energy consump-
tion indices for each building type. Chapter IV discusses the generation
of the land use based emission factors from these activity factors.
C. APPROACH TO LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
The objective of this phase of the GEMLUP study was to develop a
set of land use based emission factors to permit the estimation of air pol-
lutant emissions resulting from the construction and operation of a major
land use project. These emission sources may be principally categorized as
follows:
• Stationary source emissions occurring on the site of the major
project (e.g., the on-site combustion of fuel oil for space
heating needs)
"Stationary source emissions occurring at the land use induced
by the major project (e.g., the on-site combustion of fuel oil
for space heating needs)
• Secondary (i.e., occurring off-site) stationary source emissions
(e.g., the combustion of fuel oil at the local electric utility
to serve the electricity demand of,the major project and
induced land uses)
• Mobile source emissions (e.g., emissions due to motor vehicular
traffic generated by the major project and induced land uses).
1-2
-------
The latter category, mobile sources, is treated separately in Volume III of
this report.
The estimation of emissions from the first three categories, all
stationary sources, is the subject of this volume of the report. The means
of this estimation is the use of land use based emission factors, that is,
emissions per unit area of a particular land use category. Given the size
of the major project and the amount of land use, air pollutant emissions
may then be estimated by taking the product of the appropriate land use
based emission factor and the area of a particular land use.
Previous compilations of land use based emission factors [5,6]
have treated emissions as a function of land area, viz.,
-"«"«
area
For example, in the Hackensack Meadowlands Study [5], this was
an appropriate approach as the emission factors were developed for a speci-
fic region with a specified density of development. However, the require-
ments of the GEMLUP study necessitate the development of emission factors
that are more general izable. In particular, the emission factors presented
in this report are a function of building floor area, viz.,
emission factor »- Missions. -----------
unit building floor area
As the output of the land use model in this project is in units of building
floor area, the question of the density of development is moot. It should
be noted that a true land use based emission factor may be constructed for
a particular application by taking the product of the factor presented here
and an appropriate floor area ratio (FAR), viz.,
emissions emissions ^ FAR
unit land area unit floor area
where FAR is the floor area ratio or building floor area per unit lot area.
In regional studies, an adjustment may be necessary between the net FAR and
gross FAR (i.e., including streets, vacant land).
1-3
-------
1. Emission Factor Structure
The land use based emission factdrs and emissions per unit floor
area may be disaggregated into two factors, an activity factor (i.e., fuel
throughput, etc., per unit floor area), and the "Standard" emission factor
(i.e., emissions per unit fuel). For example, in the case of fuel oil space
heating consumption, this would be,
emissions, gr. oil consumption, gals. * emissions, gr.
3 3
floor area, 10 sq.ft. floor area, 10 sq.ft. oil consumption, gals.
Given this structure, a complete set of land use based emission factors would
consist of an n-dimensional array with specific values given for a pollutant
species, fuel or process type, building category, and, in some cases, energy
requirements (e.g.s region of the country).
Ignoring the solvent evaporation, solid waste disposal, and
other miscellaneous emissions*, the energy consumption related emission
factor can be generalized as follows:
emissions. . b Btu. Btu. Btu.
i»J»K = r/ 1 . i j. '
sq.ft. • year LV sq.ft. • year sq.ft. • ht.d.d. sq.ft. • cl.d.d.
emissions.
1 -* 1
heat content^ seasonal efficiency.. unit fuel^ Jk
where
ht.d.d. = heating degree days per year
cl.d.d. = cooling degree days per year
and for a particular fuel type i, pollutant species j
and building category k.
*Emissions from these sources are not considered in this report, since there
is both more limited information about their characteristics and that they
may be expected to display more variation in per unit floor area emissions
between parts of the country. However, the emission factor structure dis-
cussed above is amenable to their inclusion. It is recommended that they
be included in areas where there are significant emission sources and/or
better information concerning their characteristics is available.
1-4
-------
The fourth term in this equation, emissions per unit fuel, are
the commonly used values determined directly from the EPA Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors [7]. Hence, the focus of this project is generat-
ing the first three terms (i.e., the activity factor).
The first three terms identify the fuel consumption per build-
ing floor area given the heating and cooling degree days. The heat content
of a fuel in British thermal units is approximately constant and is well
known [8]. It does display some variation for every fuel, especially for
natural gas in different regions of the country [9].
The values for the efficiency for various building types and
fuels are less well known. Efficiency can be defined in a variety of ways.
The purpose of this application is to account for the differences in the
amount of energy consumed by a building depending on the fuel type selected
to provide that energy. This is not the heating unit efficiency, which is
measured at a full load steady state operation. Thus, it does not account
for rapid on and off cycling associated with the typical oversized furnace.
Nor (in the case of gas furnaces) does it measure the pilot light fuel con-
sumption when the furnace is off.
The desired efficiency measure is the ratio of heat loss from
a structure to the energy input to the structure variously defined as effi-
ciency of utilization or seasonal efficiency. Even with agreement on a
definition of efficiency, there is some disagreement in the literature over
what are appropriate values.
The term in brackets, the energy requirement per square foot
and per square foot degree day, represents the energy requirements of a
building. It is divided into three components:
,« Process use of energy that, is .not related to climate;
examples include:
Lighting Water heating equipment
Elevators Cooking equipment
Refrigeration Ventilation
1-5
-------
• Energy requirements for space heating as a function of
heating degree days*
• Energy requirements for air conditioning as a function
of cooling degree days.
D. VARIANCE OF ENERGY REQUIREMENT, EFFICIENCY, AND EMISSION FACTORS
The energy requirement factor, the efficiency of utilization, and
the standard emission factors are all estimates of the mean of population
values and can be expected to display a large variation. In general, these
factors are not precise indicators of energy requirement, efficiency, or
emissions of a single source. They are more valid when applied to a large
number of sources. Sources of variation in the energy requirement and
efficiency factors are discussed below.
1. Energy Requirements
The expression of the energy requirement of a building category
as solely a function of floor area and heating or cooling degree days is
only a gross approximation of energy demand. While this approach was
once used as a technique for predicting energy consumption for space heating
in buildings [29], it is more typical now to use a calculated heat loss
method [14]. The use of a degree day-square foot method is less precise in
that it does not allow for variation in exposure, type of construction, ratio
of exposed area to floor area, type of occupancy, outside temperature, wind,
and humidity. In fact, recent research has shown considerable variation in
*Early this century heating engineers developed the concept of heating degree
days as a useful index of heating fuel requirements. They found that when
the daily mean temperature is lower than 65 degrees, most buildings require
heat to maintain an inside temperature of 70 degrees. The daily mean
temperature is obtained by adding together the maximum and minimum tempera-
ture reported for the day and dividing the total by two. Each degree of
mean temperature below 65 is counted as one heating degree day. Thus, if
the maximum temperature is 70 degrees and the minimum 52 degrees, four
heating degree days would be produced. (70 + 52 * 122; 122 divided by
2 = 61; 65 - 61 = 4). If the daily mean temperature is 65 degrees or
higher, the heating degree day total is zero. A map of iso-heating degree
days for the United States is shown on Figure 1-1 [10].
1-6
-------
Figure 1-1: NORMAL SEASONAL HEATING DEGREE DAYS t BASE 65°F ) 1941-1970
-------
the fuel consumption of identical buildings. The Center for Environmental
Studies has observed that occupant behavior is a significant component of
monthly energy consumption in identical townhouses in a residential project
in New Jersey [11].
The only area where an energy requirement per square foot
degree day factor has been adequate in predicting fuel consumption is in the
residential oil dealer industry. In this industry, it is common practice
to predict when another oil delivery is required on the basis of degree days
alone. The energy requirement factor is in essence calculated for each oil
customer on the basis of past experience, thereby implicitly accounting for
type of construction and occupant lifestyle.
The estimation of cooling requirements as a function of build-
ing floor area and cooling degree days* poses problems similar to the esti-
mation of heating requirements discussed above. However, unlike the rela-
tionship between heating degree days and space heating energy consumption,
(viz., heating degree days can at least successfully predict energy consump-
tion in the same building over time) the relationship between cooling degree
days and energy use is less precise. There is considerable controversy
among meteorologists, as well as air conditioning engineers as to what
meteorological variables are most closely related to energy consumption
by air conditioning systems. Many experts argue that because high humidity
levels make people feel more uncomfortable as temperatures rise, some measure
of moisture should be included in calculating energy needs for air condition-
ing. The Temperature-Humidity Index has been suggested as an alternative
basis for calculating cooling degree days. In addition to humidity, some
experts feel there are other factors, such as cloudiness and wind speed,
that should be included in computation of energy needs for air conditioning.
*The cooling degree day is a mirror image of the heating degree day. After
obtaining the daily mean temperature, by adding together the day's high
and low temperatures and dividing the total by two, the base 65 is sub-
tracted from the resulting figure to determine the cooling degree day total.
For example, a day with a maximum temperature of 82 degrees and a minimum
of 60 would produce six cooling degree days. (82 + 60 * 142; 142 divided
by 2 = 71; 71 - 65 = 6). If the daily mean temperature is 65 degrees or
lower, the cooling degree day total is zero [10].
1-8
-------
Also, solar heat gain will vary between different regions of the country
as the solar angle changes due to differences 1n latitude.
Nevertheless, this study will use cooling degree days as an
Index of cooling demand in nonresldential buildings. It is the most
adequate index that is readily available for all areas of the country
and for time periods shorter than a calendar year. A map of the United
States showing iso-cooling degree days is shown in Figure 1-2.
For residential buildings, this study will use the estimated
compressor operating hours of residential air conditioning units as compiled
by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. It is a more adequate index than cooling
degree days as it does take humidity and latitude into account. It is not
used in this study for nonresidential buildings because it was developed
for application to residential buildings only. In addition, regression
analysis* of nonresidential building energy consumption showed no difference
between the explanatory power of cooling degree days and compressor operat-
ing hours. A map of iso-compressor operating hours is shown in Eigure 1-3.
Their derivation is discussed in Appendix A.
2. Efficiency of Utilization
For reasons similar to the above, the efficiency of utilization
will also display variation between buildings of the same category. The
type and size of the heating system and age and condition will effect its
efficiency. In particular, in residential applications, the size of the
furnace relative to the structure's heat loss will determine the number of
times it is cycling on and off, thereby not operating at full load steady
state and maximum efficiency. Losses are incurred during the system start
up and shut down as well as when the system is off due to flue heat loss
and, in gas systems, pilot light consumption.
*See Appendix B and C.
1-9
-------
I
o
1-2: NORMAL SEASONAL COOLING DEGREE DAYS ( BASE 65°F ) 1941-1970
-------
I ^+~ioo •"•• y^
r^tJTni
It—y=A ..V'
FIGURE 1-3. ANNUAL AIR CONDITIONER COMPRESSOR-OPERATING HOURS FOR HOMES THAT ARE NOT
NATURALLY VENTILATED. Source: Oak Ridge National Laboratory [17].
-------
II. SUMMARY OF LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
This chapter presents a tabular summary of the land use based emission
factors as developed in Chapters III and IV. The emission factors are pre-
sented in units of pounds of pollutant emitted per "measure" for oil and
gas combustion. For electricity consumption, the factors are in terms of
kilowatt-hours per "measure". The measure, depending on the activity
involved, may be per square foot of building floor area, per square foot
heating degree day, per dwelling unit, etc.
The quantity of secondary, i.e., offsite, emissions occurring due to
electricity consumption depends on the nature of the local electris utiltty *••-.
generating station. It is suggested that the local utility be contacted
to determine the appropriate emission factor. Default values of pounds of
pollutant emissions per kilowatt-hour sold are presented in Table 2-1 and
are based on data in References 7, 34, and 35. It should also be pointed
out that the emissions due to increased electrical demand do not necessarily
occur at the nearest generating plant.
Tables 2-2 through 2-13 present the land use based emission factors for
residential, commercial, institutional and industrial land uses. The indus-
trial factors do not include process emissions, as explained in Chapter III.
Table 2-1 presents the default electric utility emission factors in
SI (Systfeme International d1 Unite's) units, kilograms of emissions per joule
of electricity. Tables 2-14 through 2-25 presents the land use based emis-
sion factors in SI units.
The emission factors in the following tables are for uncontrolled
emissions as presented in sections 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4 of AP-42 [7].
2-1
-------
TABLE 2-1
TYPICAL EMISSION FACTORS FOR ELECTRIC UTILITIES
Pounds of
coal
oil
gas
5.
6.
1.
PM
23
34
19
Ki
x
x
X
10"3A
io-4
io-4
lograms
pol
1
1
7
of
lutant emissions
.53
.26
.13
pol
PM
coal
oil
gas
Note:
6.
7.
1.
A 33
59
99
50
.3%
x
x
x
io-10
io-11
io-11
overall
1
1
8
V
.93
.59
.98
ant
sov
x
x 10
x 10
x 10
-2s
-2s
-6
4.
2.
2.
per kilowatt hour sold to customer
03
38
02
lutant emissions
sov
x
x 10
x 10
x 10
-9s
-9s
-13
efficiency
5.
3.
2.
is
08
00
55
CO HC N0x
x IO"4 1.21 x IO"4 2.21 x IO"2
x IO"4 1.58 x IO"4 8.32 x IO"3
x 10"4 1.19 x IO"5 8.32 x IO"3
per joule soljd to customer (SI Units)
CO HC NOV
-11 -11 -Q
x 10 " 1.52 x 10 " 2.78 x 10 y
x IO"11 1.99 x IO"11 1.05 x IO"9
x 10"11 1.50 x 10"12 1.05 x 10"9
assumed for coal fired plants t34] .
A 31.6% overall plant efficiency is assumed for oil and gas fired plants [34].
A 10% transmission loss is assumed [35].
'S' and 'A' represent, respectively, the sulfur and ash percentage of fuel by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-2
'SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
PM
SO.
CO
HC
NO
kWh
Measure
ro
CO
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Central
Electricity
Gas
Room
Electricity
Process
Hot Water
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Cooking
Electricity
Gas
Miscellaneous
3.8!
2.6 x 10
2.2 x 10
"4
"3
1.5xlO
~5
5.1 x 10
"4
2.0 x
2.6 x 10
"3
3.2 x 10"2S l.lxlO"3
6.6xlO"4 2.6 x 10"3
l.SxlO"4 l.lxlO"5 3.5 x 10
4.7-
"4 1.4 x 10"4 1.8 x 10"3 - !
dwelling unit-?ht.d.d.
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.
dwelling unit-op.hr.
dwelling unit-op.hr.
5.1x10"^ a.c. unit-operating hour
,-1
,-2
,-1
T.4xlO
+4
3.0x10"' 1.8x10"* 6.0x10"' 2.4x10' 3.0
2.5
3.7.x 10"]S 1.2 7.5 x 10"1 3.0
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit. year
dwelling unit-year
l.lxlO"1 6.6 x 10"3 2.2 x 10"1 8.8 x 10"2 1.1
3. 5il 0+3 dwelling unit-year
; dwelling unit-year
7.9x10 dwelling unit-year
Note: A 1600 squ'are foot dwelling unit is assumed.
'S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-3
MOBILE «0ME RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
Activity PM SO CO HC NOV kWh
X A
Space Heating
Electricity - - - - - 2.32
Gas 1.7xlO"4 9.9 x 10"6 3.3 x 10"4 1.3xlO"4 1.7xlO"3 -
Oil 1.4xlO"3 2.0 x 10"2S 6.9 x 10"4 4.2 x 10"4 1.7xlO"3 -
Air Conditioning
Central
T3 Electricity - - - - - 3.4
Room
Electricity - - - - 5-lxlO"1
Process
Hot Water
Electricity - - - - - K3 x 10+4
Gas 3.0 x 10"1 1.8 x 10"2 6.0 x 10"1 2.4 x 10"1 3.0
Oil 2.5 3.6 x 10+1S 1.2 7.5 x 10"1 3.0
Cooking
Electricity - - - - - 3.5 x 10+3
Gas l.lxlO"1 6.6 x 10"3 2.2 x 10"1 8.8 x 10"2 1.1
Miscellaneous - - - - - 7.9 x 10
Measure
dwelling unit'ht.d.d
dwelling unit'ht.d.d
dwelling unit'ht.d.d
dwelling unit*-op.hr.
a.c. unit»op.hr.
dwelling unit.year
dwelling unit.year
dwelling unit.year
dwelling unit»year
dwelling unit.year
dwelling unit.year
iNote: A 720 square feet per dwelling unit is assumed.
'S1 represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-4
LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
Activity
PM
pound of pollutant (kilowatt-hours) per measure
SO
CO
HC
NO
kWh
Measure
Ul
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Central
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Room
Electricity
Process
Hot Water
Electricity
1.3
1.2 x 10
1.1 x 10
"4
~3
7.3 x 10
"6
2.4 x 10
"4
1.7 x 10~2S 5.7 x 10"4
9.7 x 10
3.4 x 10
"5
"4
1.2 x 10
1.4 x 10
"3
"3
1.5
6.2 x 10
4.5 x 10
-5
-4
3.7 x 10
6.4 x 10
-6
-3
1.2 x 10
2.2 x 10
-4
-4
5.0 x 10
1.3 x 10
-5
-4
6.2 x 10
5.3 x 10
-4
-4
5,1x10
-1
^+4
dwelling unit'ht.d.d.
dwelling unit* ht.d.d.
dwelling unit-tit.d.d.
dwelling unit-op.hr.
dwelling unit-op.hr.
dwelling unit^op.hr.
a.c. unit'op.hr.
1.1 x 10 dwelling unit.year
Gas
Oil
Cooking & Dryer
Electricity
Gas
Miscellaneous
2
2
_
1
-
.4 x 10"'
.0
.2 x 10"1
1.4 x 10"*
2.9 x 10+1S
_
7.2 x 10~3
• -
4
1
_
2
-
.8 x 10"'
.0
.4 x 10"1
1.9
6.0
_
9.6
-
x 10"'
x 10'1
x 10~2
2.4
2.4
_
1.2
-
-
-
3.8 x 10+3
_
4.4 x 10+3
dwel 1 i ng
dwelling
dwel 1 i ng
dwelling
dwelling
unit-year
unit. year
unit. year
unit- year
unit«year
Note: A 900 square foot dwelling unit is assumed.
'S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-5
HIGH RISF MULTIFAMILY-RESIDENTIAL LAND USE."BASED EMISSION FACTORS
en
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
Activity PM SOV CO HC NOV kwh
A A
Space Heating
Electricity - - - - - 1.5
Gas l.OxlO"4 6.2 x 10"6 2.1 x 10"4 8.3 x 10"5 l.OxlO"3 -
Oil l.OxlO"3 1.5 x 10"2S 5.2 x 10"4 3.1 x 10"4 1.3xlO"3 -
Air Conditioning
Central
Electricity - - - - - 1.5
Room
Electricity - - - - - .51
Process
Hot Water
Electricity - - - - - 6.2 x 10+3
Gas 1.4X10"1 8.4 x 10"3 2.8 x 10"1 l.lxlO"1 1.4
Oil 1.1 1.6 x 10+1S 5.7 x 10"1 3.4 x 10"1 1.4
Cooking & Dryer
Electricity - - - - 3.8 x 10+3
Gas 1.2X10"1 7. 2x 10"3 2.4 x 10"1 9.6 x 10"2 1.2
+3
Miscellaneous - - - - - 5.9x10
Measure
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.
dwelling unit-op.hr.
dwelling unit-op.hr.
dwelling unit -year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
dwell ing unit-year
Note: A 900 square foot dwelling unit is assumed.
'S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-6
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, WAREHOUSES, WHOLESALING ESTABLISHMENTS, LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
Activity
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Process
Hot Water
El ectri ci ty
Gas
Oil
Lighting
Auxiliary
Equipment
Appliances
Refrigeration
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
PM SOV CO HC NOV kWh
A A
1.3 x 10"3
9.8 x 10"8 5.9 x 10"9 2.0 x 10"7 7.8 x 10"8 9.8 x 10"7 -
1.7xlO"6 1.2xlO'5S 2.9 x 10"7 3.3 x 10"5 4.4 x 10"6 -
5.2 x 10"3
5.0 x 10"1
2.4 x 10"5 1.4xlO"6 4.8 x 10"5 1.9xlO"5 2.4 x 10"4 -
5.2 x 10"4 3.6 x 10"3S 9.1 x 10"5 l.OxlO"2 1.4xlO"3 -
8.0
3.6
2.0
8.9
Measure
sq.ft.- ht.d.d.
sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
sq.ft.*cl .d.d.
sq.ft.^year
sq.ft.* year
sq.ft.* year
sq.ft.* year
sq ..ft.* year
sq.ft. -year
sq.ft.* year
Note: rS' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-7
OFFICE BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
Activity
PM
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
SO CO HC NO., kWh
Measure
PO
i
00
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
El ectri ci ty
Gas
Oil
Process
9.4 x 10"8 5.6 x 10"9 1.9 x 10"7
1.7 x 10"6 1.2 x 10"5S 2.9 x 10"7
7.4 x 10"8 4.4 x 10"9
1.5 x 10
-7
1.3 x 10"6 9.1 x 10"6S 2.3 x 10"7
7.5 x 10"8 9.4 x 10"7
3.3 x 10"5 4.4 x 10"6
5.9 x 10"8 7.4 x 10"7
2.6 x 10"5 3.4 x 10"6
1.9 x 10"3 sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
sq.ft.-tit.d.d.
1.5 x 10
-3
2.8 x 10
+1
sq.ft.*cl .d.d.
sq.ft.- cl .d.d.
sq.ft.. cl .d.d.
sq.ft.'year
Note: *S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by wetght.
-------
ro
UD
TABLE 2-8
NQNHOUSEKEEPING* RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
Activity
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Process
PM
_
9.4
1.4
_
2.3
4.1
-
x 10'8
x 10'6
x 10"8
x 10"7
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
SOV CO HC NOY
X «
-
5.6 x 10"9
9.9 x 10"6S
_
1.4 x 10"9
2.8 x 10"6S
-
_
1.9
2.5
_
4.6
7.1
-
x 10"7
x 10"7
x 10"8
x 10"8
-
7.5 x
2.8 x
_
1.8 x
8.0 x
-
TO'8
ID'5
10"8
ID'6
-
9.4 x 10"7
2.8 x 10"5
_
2.3 x 10"7
1.1 x 10"6
-
kWh
1.7 x 10"3 sq
sq
sq
4.7 x 10"4 sq
sq
sq
1.2 x 10+1 sq
Measure
.ft.
.ft.
.ft.
.ft.
.ft.
.ft.
.ft.
•ht.d.d.
• ht.d.d.
•ht.d.d.
• cl .d.d.
•cl.d.d.
rcl.d.d.
«year
* Hotels, Motels, Dorma tones, etc..
Note: 'S1 represents the sulfur percentage of otl, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-9
HOSPITAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
Activity PM SOV CO HC NOV kWh
A A
Space Heating
Electricity - - - - - 2.2 x 10"3
Gas 1.8 x 10"7 1.1 x 10"8 3.7 x 10"7 1.5xlO"7 l.SxlO"6 -
Oil 3.3 x 10"6 2.3 x 10"5S 5.8 x 10"7 6.6 x 10"5 8.7 x 10"6 -
Air Conditioning
Electricity - - - - - 5.9 x 10"
T5 Process
° Lighting - - - - 1.5 x 10+1
Auxiliary - - - - - 1.7 x 10+1
Equipment
Appliances - - - - - 5.9
Hot Water
Electricity - - - 5.0
Gas 2.4 x 10"4 1.4 x 10"5 4.8 x 10"4 1.9 x 10"4 2.4 x 10"3 -
Oil 5.2 x 10"3 3.6 x 10"2S 9.1 x 10"4 1.0 x 10"1 1.4 x 10"2 -
Measure
sq.
sq.
sq.
sq.
sq.
sq.
sq.
sq.
sq.
sq.
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
.•ht.d.d.
.•ht.d.d.
.•ht.d.d.
.•cl .d.d.
•year
•year
.•year
.•year
.'year
. -year
Note: 'S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
ro
i
TABLE 2-10
CULTURAL BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
Activity
PM
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
SOV CO HC NOY
X A
kWh
Measure
Space Heating
Electricity -
Gas 9,0 x 10
Oil 1.6 x 10
Air Conditioning
Electricity -
Gas 2.9 x 10
Oil 5,1 x 10
Process
1.8 x 10
-3
"8 5.4 x 10"9 1.8 x 10"7 7.2 x 10"8 9.0 x 10"7
"6 1.1 x 10"5S 2.8 x 10"7 3.2 x 10"5 4.2 x 10"6
"8 1.7 x 10"9 5.7 x 10"8 2,3 x 10"8 2.9 x 10"7
"7 3.6 x 10"6S 8.9 x 10~8 1.0 x 10"5 1.3 x 10"6
5.9 x 10'
1.2 x 1-0
,+1
sq.ft.«ht.d.d.
sq.ft.'ht.d.d.
sq.ft.'ht.d.d.
sq.ft.*cl.d.d,
sq.ft.'cl.d.d.
sq.ft.'cl.d.d.
sq.ft.*year
Note: 'S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
ro
.j
ro
TABLE 2-11
CHURCH BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
Activity
PM
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
SO CO HC N0¥
X A
kWh
Measure
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Process
1.4 x 10~7 B.6 x 10"9 2.9 x 10"7 l.lxlO"7 1.4xlO"6
2.9 x 10
-3
2.6 x 10
"6 1.8 x 10"5S 4.5 x 10"7 5.0 x 10"5 6.7 x 10"6
1.8 x 10
3.3 x 10
"7 1.1 x 10"8 3.7 x 10"7 1.5 x 10"7 1.8 x 10"6
"6 2.3 x 10"5S 5.7 x 10"7 6.4 x 10"5 8,6 x 10"6
3.8 x 10
4.2
-3
sq.ft.'ht.d.d.
sq.ft.'ht.d.d.
sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
sq.ft.'cl.d.d.
sq.ft.'cl.d.d.
sq.ft.'cl.d.d.
sq.ft.^year
Note: 'Sl represents the sulfur percentage of otl, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-12
SCHOOL BUILDING LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
Activity
PM
pound of pollutant (or kilowatt-hours) per measure
SO.
CO
HC
NO.
kWh
Measure
ro
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Process
8.0 x 10"8 4.8 x 10"9 1.6 x 10"7
1.2 x 10"6 8.5 x 10"6 2.1 x 10"7
2.3 x 10~8 1.4 x 10"9 4.6 x 10"8
4.1 x 10"7 2.8 x 10"6 7.1 x 10"8
6.4 x 10
2.4 x 10
-8
-5
8.0 x 10
3.2 x 10
-7
-6
1.8 x 10
8.0 x 10
-8
-6
2.3 x 10
1.1 x 10
-7
-6
1.7 x 10"3 sq.ft.'ht.d.d.
sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
4.7 x 10~4 sq.ft.* cl.d.d.
sq.ft.* cl.d.d.
sq.ft.* cl .d.d.
7.1 sq.ft.* year
Note: 'Sl represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-13
ESTIMATED NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION
FACTORS BY TWO DIGIT 1967 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE
SIC
Code
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
19 &
pounds of pollutant (or kWh'of electricity) per floor
PM SOY CO HC NOV
A X
.64
1.22
.58
.06
.06
.11
3.12
.01
.10
1.06
.51
.17
4.03
3.06
.14
.22
.22
.68
.95
39 .08
.50
1.02
.54
.04
.07
.08
3.09
.02
.46
2.78
.38
.17
2.67
2.38
.12
.18
.20
.48
.70
.13
.013
.025
.014
.0014
.0034
.0022
.069
.00068
.011
.055
.010
.0047
.72
.061
.0035
.0047
.0053
.013
.018
.0035
.0033
.014
.0081
.00084
.0023
.0012
.040
.00048
.0081
.038
.0058
.0029
.038
.034
.0021
.0027
.0032
.0068
.0095
.0024
.13
.23
.14
.015
.045
.021
.69
.0095
.16
.73
.097
.052
.61
.57
.036
.046
.056
.11
,15
.044
area sq.ft.«year
J
38
48
68
16
22
14
85
25
181
426
50
18
78
297
33
31
56
54
38
31
Note: The following is assumed: 2% sulfur in coal
10% ash in coal
0.2% sulfur in distillate oil
1.75% sulfur in residual otl
1967 SIC codes are used because of data availability. The
1972 SIC code manual provides conversions between 1967 and
1972 codes 139].
2-14
-------
TABLE 2-14
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
Activity PM
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules of electricity) per measure
SO
CO
HC
NO
Measure
2.1 x 10~4 1.2 x 10"5 4.2 x 10"4
ro
8.2 x 10"5 5.0 x 10"6 1 .6 x 10"4
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil l.SxlO"3 2.6 x 10"2S 9.0 x 10"4
Air Conditioning
Central
Electricity -
Gas
Room
Electricity -
Process
Hot Water
Electricity -
Gas
Oil 1.1
Cooking
Electricity -
Gas 5.0 x 10"2 3.0 x 10"3 l.OxlO"1
Miscellaneous -
1.4 x 10"1 8.2 x 10"3 2.7 x 10"1
1.7 x 10+1S 5.4 x 10"1
1.6xlO
5.4 x 10
"4
"4
6.4 x 10
"5
l.lxlO
3.4 x 10
"1
"1
4.0 x 10
~2
2.1 x 10"3
2.1 x 10"3
8.2 x 10
"4
1.4
1.4
5.0 x 10
"1
2.5 x 10 dwelling unit*ht.d.d. ,°K
- dwelling unit-ht.d.d. ,°K
- dwelling unit-ht.d.d. ,°K
+7
1.7x10 dwelling unit-op.br.
dwelling unit-op.hr.
1.8 x 10 dwelling unit-op.hr.
4.9 x 10 dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
1.3 x 10 dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
2.8 x 10 dwelling unit-year
Note: A 149 square meter dwelling unit is assumed.
'S1 represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-15
MOBILE HOME RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
Activity
PM
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules) per measure
SO.
CO
HC
NO.
Measure
ro
cr>
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Central
Electricity
Room
Electricity
Process
Hot Water
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Cooking
Electricity
Gas
Miscellaneous
1.4 x 10
1.1 x 10
-4
-3
1.4 x 10
1.1
-1
8.1 x 10"6 2.7 x 10^4 1.1 x 10"4 1..4 x 10"3
1.6 x 10"2S 5.6 x 10"4 3.4 x 10"4 1.4xlO~3
8.2 x 10"3 2.7 x 10"1 1.1 x 10"1 1.4
1.7 x lO^S 5.4 x 10"1 3.4 x 10"1
1.4
5.0 x 10"2 3.0 x 10"3 l.OxlO"1 4.0 x 10"2 5.0 x 10"1
1.5 x 10+7 dwelling unit'ht.d.d. ,°K
dwelling unit'ht.d.d. ,°K
dwelling unif ht.d.d.^K
1.2 x 10 dwelling unit«op.hr.
1.8 x 10 dwelling unit-op.hr.
4.9 x 10 dwelling unit»year
dwelling unit'year
dwelling unifyear
1.3 x 10 dwelling unifyear
dwelling unifyear
2.8 x 10 dwelling unifyear
Note: A 67 square meter dwelling unit is assumed.
'S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight,
-------
TABLE 2-16
LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
Activity
PM
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules) per measure
SO
CO
HC
NO
Measure
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Central
T5 Electricity
^ Gas
Oil
Room
Electricity
Process
Hot Water
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Cooking, Dryer
Electricity
Gas
Miscellaneous
9.8 x 10"5 6.0 x 10"6 2.0 x 10"4 7.9 x 10"5 9.8 x 10"4
9.0 x 10"4 1.4 x 10"2S 4.7 x 10"4 2.8 x 10"4 1.1 x 10"3
2.8 x 10"5 1.7xlO"6 5.4 x 10"3 2.3 x 10"5 2.8 x 10"4
2.0 x 10"4 2.9 x 10"3S 1.0 x 10"4 5.9 x 10"5 2.4 x 10"4
l.lxlO"1 6.4 x 10"3 2.2 x 10"1 8.6 x 10"2 1.1
9.1 x 10"1 1.3 x 10+1S 4.5 x 10"1 2.7 x 10"1 1.1
5.4 x 10"2 3.3 x 10"3 l.lxlO"1 4.4 x 10"2 5.4 x 10"1
8.4 x 10
+6
5.4 x 10
+6
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.,°K
dwelling unit*ht.d.d.,°K
dwelling unit»ht.d.d.,°K
dwelling unit»op.hr.
dwelling unit«op.hr.
dwelling unit«op.hr.
1.8 x 10 unit-op.hr.
4.0 x 10
+10
1.4 x
1.6 x
10
+10
10
+10
dwelling unit'year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit*year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit*year
Note: An 84 square meter dwelling unit is assumed.
'S1 represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-17
HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
Activity
PM
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules of electricity) per measure
SOV CO HC NOV J
A X
Measure
ro
oo
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Central
Electricity
Room
Electricity
Process
Hot Water
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Cooking, Dryer
Electricity
Gas
Miscellaneous
8.2 x 10"5 5.1 x 10"6 1.7 x 10"4 6.8 x 10"5 8.2 x 10"4
8.2 x 10"4 1.2 x 10"2S 4.2 x 10"4 2.5 x 10"4 1.1 x 10"3
6.4 x 10"2 3.8 x 10"3
5.0 x 10"1 7.3S
5.4 x 10~2 3.3 x 10~3
1.3 x 10"1 5.0 x 10"2 6.4 x 10"1
2.6 x 10"1 1.5 x 10"1
6.4 x 10
"1
1.1 x 10~] 4.4 x 10"2 5.4 x 10"1
7.5 x 10
,+6
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.,°K
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.,°K
dwelling unit-ht.d.d.,°K
5,4 x 10 dwelling unit-op.hr.
1.8 x 10 dwelling unit-op.hr.
2.2 x 10+1° dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit'year
1.4 x 10 dwelling unit-year
dwelling unit-year
s.l x 10 dwelling unit-year
Note: An 84 square meter dwelling unit is .assumed.
'S1 represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-18
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, WAREHOUSES, WHOLESALING ESTABLISHMENTS, LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
Activity
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Process
)
. Hot Water
*
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Lighting
Auxiliary
Equipment
Appliances
Refrigeration
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules;of electricity) per
PM SOV CO HC N0¥ J
y\ A
9.1
8.6 x 10"7 5.2 x 10"8 1.8 x 10"6 6.9 x 10"7 8.6 x 10"7 -
1.5 x 10"5 1.1 x 10"4S 2.5 x 10"6 2.9 x 10"4 3.9 x 10"5 -
3.6
1.9
1.2 x 10"4 6.8 x 10"6 2.3 x 10"4 9.3 x 10"5 1.2xlO'3 -
2.5 x 10"3 1.8xlO"2S 4.4 x 10"4 4.9 x 10"2 6.8 x 10"3 -
3.1
1.4
7.8
3.4
measure
xlO+4
xlO+5
xlO+7
xlO+8
xlO+8
xlO+7
xlO+8
Measure
2
m ••ht.d.d.s
2
m -ht.d.d.,
m2-ht.d.d.,
2
m 'cl.d.d.,
m -year
nr*year
m »year
m -year
m -year
m -year
2
m »year
°K
°K
°K
°K
Note: 1S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-19
OFFICE BUILDINGS, LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
ro
IV)
o
Activity
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Process
PM
„
8.3
1.5
_
6.5
1.1
-
x IO"7
x IO"5
x IO"7
x IO"5
kilogram
S0x
—
4.9 x
1.1 x
_
3.9 x
8.0 x
-
10"8
10"4S
io-8
10"5S
of pollutant (or Joules
CO HC
_
1.7 x
2.5 x
_
1.3 x
2.0 x
-
io-6
io-6
io-6
io-6
—
6.6
2.9
_
5.2
2.3
-
x IO"7
x IO"4
x 10"7
x IO"4
of electrtcity) per measure
NO J Measure
A
_
8.3
2.9
_
6.5
3.0
-
1.3 x 1 0+5
x 10"6 -
x 10"4 -
1.0 x 10+5
x 10"6 -
x IO"5 -
1.1 x 10+9
2
m .ht.d.d. ,°K
m 2«ht.d.d. ,°K
m 2-ht.d.d. ,°K
m • cl .d.d. ,°K
m • cl .d.d. ,°K
m • cl .d.d. ,°K
.2
m -year
Note: 'S1 represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-20
NONHOUSEKEEPING RESIDENTIAL LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules of electricity) per measure
Activity PM SOY
/\
Space Heating
Electricity - - 1.2 x 10+5 m2-ht.d.d.,°K
Gas 3.9 x 10"7 4.0 x 10"8 1.7xlO"6 6.6xlO"7 8.3 x 10"6 - m2'ht.d.d.,°K
Oil 1.2xlO"5 8.7 x 10"5S 2.2 x 10"6 2.5 x 10"4 2.5 x 10"4 - m2'ht.d.d.,°K
Air Conditioning
Electricity - - - - - 3.3 x 10+4 nt2* year
7> Gas 2.0 x 10"7 1.2 x 10"8 4.0 x 10"7 1.6 x 10"7 2.0 x 10"6 - m2- year
- Oil 3.6 x 10"7 2.5 x 10"6S 6.2 x 10"7 7.0 x 10"5 9.7 x 10"6 - m2- year
Process - - - - - 4.7 x 10+8 m2- year
Note: 1S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-21
HOSPITAL, LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules of electricity) per measure
Activity PM SOV CO HC NO J Measure
Space Heating
Electricity -
Gas
Oil
1.6
2.9
x 10"6
x 10"6
9.7
2.0
x 10"8
x 10"5S
3.3 x
5.1 x
io-6
io-6
1.3
5.8
x 10"6
x IO"4
1.6
7.6
1.5 x 10+5 m2«ht.d.d.
x IO"5 -
x IO"5 -
2
m »ht.d.d.
m2'ht.d.d.
,°K
,°K
,°K
Air Conditioning
Electricity - 4.1 x 10"5 m2-cl .d.d. ,°K
^ Process
1 X/
1
!^ Lighting -
Auxiliary Equipment - - - -
Appliances -
Hot Water
Electricity - - - -
Gas 1.2 x IO"3 6.8 x IO"5 2.3 x IO"3 9.3 x IO"4
Oil 2.5 x IO"2 l.SxlO^S 4.4 x IO"3 4.9 x IO"1
5.8
6.6
2.3
1.9
1.2 x IO"2 -
6.8 x IO"2 -
xlO+8
xlO+8
x 10
xlO+8
2
m «year
m -year
m «year
m »year
m 'year
2
m -year
Note: 'Sl represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-22
CULTURAL BUILDINGS LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules of electricity) per measure
Activity PM SOV CO HC NOV 0 Measure
X X
Space Heating
Electricity - 1.3xlO+5 m2-ht.d.d.,°K
Gas 7.9 x 10"7 4.7 x 10"8 1.6xlO"6 6.3 x 10"7 7.9 x 10"6 - m2-ht.d.d. ,°K
Oil 1.4 x 10"5 9.7 x 10"5S 2.5 x 10"6 2.8 x 10"4 3.7 x 10"5 - m2-ht.d.d. ,°K
Air Conditioning
Electricity - - - - - 4.1 x 10+4 m2-cl.d.d.,°K
Gas 2.5 x 10"7 l.BxlO"8 5.0 x 10"7 2.0 x 10"7 2.5 x 10"6 - m2-cl.d.d. ,°K
Oil 4.5 x 10"6 3.2 x 10"5S 7.8 x 10"7 8.8 x 10"5 l.lxlO"5 - m2-cl.d.d. ,°K
+8 2
Process - - - 4.7 x 10 m -year
Note: *S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-23
CHURCH BUILDINGS LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
Activity
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
T5 Gas
ro
*• Oil
Process
_
1
2
_
1
2
PM
.2 x 10"6
.3 x IO"5
.6 x 10"
.9 x 10
kilogram of pollutant (or
sox co
_
7.6 x IO"8
1.6 x 10"4S
_
97 x in.
• / A i \J it
2.0 x 10'^S
-
_
2.
4.
_
3.
5.
-
5 x 10"6
0 x IO"6
3 x 10~f-
0 x 10"b
Joules
HC
M
9.7 x
4.4 x
_
1.3 x
5.6 x
-
of electricity) per measure
N0x J
_
IO"7 1,
IO"4 5.
_
10"6 1.
10 7.
-
2 x
9 x
6 x
6 x
2.0 x 10+5
10"5 -
io-5 -
2.7 x 10+5
"1 -
10"4 -
i Q
1.6 x 10+8
Measure
m2'ht.d.d
m2-ht.d.d
m2.ht.d.d
m2»cl.d.d
2 1 A A
nip'Cl .d.d
m 'cl .d.d
o
m -year
.,°K
-,°K
.,°K
« » i\
* 9 "
OO]/
• i r\
Note: 'S' represents the sulfur percentage of oil, by weight.
-------
TABLE 2-24
SCHOOL BUILDINGS LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS (SI UNITS)
kilogram of pollutant (or Joules of electricity) per measure
Activity PM SO CO HC NOV J Measure
X • X
Space Heating
Electricity - - - - - 1.2 x 10+5 ra2'ht.d.d.,°K
Gas 7.0 x 10"7 4.2 x 10"8 1.4 x 10"6 5.6 x 10"7 7.0 x 10"6 - m2-ht.d.d.,°K
Oil 1.1 x 10"5 7.5 x 10"5S 1.8 x 10"6 2.1 x 10"4 2.8 x 10"5 - m2'ht.d.d.,°K
Air Conditioning
Electricity - - - - _6 3.3 x 10+4 m2«cl.d.d.,°K
T3 Gas 2.0 x 10"8 1.2 x 10"8 4.0 x 10"7 1.6 x 10"7 2.0x10 - m2«cl.d.d.,°K
w Oil 3.6 x 10"6 2.5 x 10"5S 6.2 x 10"7 7.0 x 10"5 9.7 x 10"6 - m2'cl.d.d.,°K
+8 2
Process - - - - - 2.8x1 m year
Note: 'S1 represents the sulfur percentage of oil» by weight.
-------
ro
en
TABLE 2-25
ESTIMATED NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL .LAND USE BASED EMISSION
FACTORS BY 2 DIGIT 1967 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE
kilograms of pollutant (or Joules of electricity) per floor area square meter-year
PM SOV CO HC NOV J
X A
20 3-12 2.44 .06 .02 ~ .61 i.sYlO9
21 5-96 4.98 .12 .07 1.12 1.9 x 109
22 2.83 2.64 .07 .04 .68 2.6 x 109
23 -29 .20 .01 .004 .07 6.2 x 108
24 -29 .34 .02 .01 .22 8.5 x 108
25 «54 -39 .01 .01 .10 5.4 x 108
5! 26 15'23 15-09 -34 .20 3.37 3.3 x 109
27 -05 .10 .003 .002 .05 9.7 x 108
28 -48 2.25 .05 .04 .78 7.0 x 109
29 5-17 13.57 .27 .19 3.56 1.7xl010
30 2.49 1.86 .05 .03 .47 l.OxlO9
31 -83 .83. .02 .01 .25 7.0 x 108
32 19-67 13.03 3.52 .19 2.98 3.0 x 109
33 14-94 11.62 .30 .17 2.78 1.2xl010
34 -68 .59 .02 .01 .18 1.3xl09
35 1-Q7 .88 .02 .01 .22 1.2 x 109
36 T-07 .98 .03 .02 .27 2.2 x 109
37 3-32 2.34 .06 .03 .54 2.1 x 109
38 4-M 3.42 .09 .05 .73 1.5xl09
39 & 19 .39 .63 .02 ^l .21 1.2xl09
Note: The following is assumed: 2% sulfur in coal
10% ash in coal
0.2% sulfur in distillate oil
1.75% sulfur in residual oil
-------
III. DEVELOPMENT OF EMISSION FACTORS
The critical element in the development of the land use based emission
factors is the development of energy requirements per square foot for various
building types. The remainder of the information needed for the emission
factor generally is available.
Much of the existing literature on energy consumption in buildings is
not applicable to the development of energy requirement factors. Most of it
is devoted to predicting the energy consumption of a single structure. The
literature that is applicable to this study falls into two classes: 1)
typical energy consumption of a building category based on engineering esti-
mates, and 2) average energy consumption from a sample of structures in a
building category. Both classes of literature are used in the following
analysis with slightly more emphasis given to the latter category.
A. RESIDENTIAL
A recent and comprehensive example of an engineering estimate is
the Task Force Report on Residential and Commercial Energy Use Patterns
prepared for Project Independence [12]. Typical construction for various
classes of buildings was identified in each of four Census Regions. Stand-
ard engineering estimates of energy consumption were then prepared, based
on the climatology of an average city in each region. Using estimates of
heating degree days and compressor operating hours (shown in Table 3-1),
Wai den prepared estimates of energy consumption per degree day and operating
hour, as shown in Table 3-2.
1. Single Family Residential
Aside from the Project Independence estimates, the following
sources were obtained. This is not a comprehensive list, but, within
the scope of this project, it is what could be obtained. In our opinion, it
1s representative of energy consumption in buildings.
3-1
-------
TABLE 3-1
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PARAMETERS
City
Northeast
Norwalk, Connecticut
North Central Region
Detroit, Michigan
South
Pine Bluff, Arkansas
West
Roswell , New Mexico
Heating Degree Days
5,400
6,200
2,800
3,800
Compressor Operating Hours
300
500
1,600
1 ,600
Note: Reference 12 and Figures 1-1 and 1-3.
3-2
-------
TABLE 3-2
ENGINEERING ESTIMATES OF REGIONAL SPACE HEATING
AND AIR CONDITIONING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Space Heating (Btu/sq.ft.-dd) Cooling (Btu/sq.ft.-hour)
Building Type Electric Gas Oil Electric Gas/Oil
Mobile Homes
North East
North Central
South
West
Single Family Detached
North East 1 Story
2 Stories
• North Central 1 Story
2 Stories
South 1 Story
2 Stories
West 1 Story
2 Stories
Single Family Attached
North East 1 Story
2 Stories
North Central 1 Story
2 Stories
South 1 Story
2 Stories
West 1 Story
2 Stories
Low Rise
North East
North Central
South
West
High Rise
North East
North Central
South
West
11.8
11.6
12.3
10.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.7
8.5
8.1
8.2
8.2
7.7
6.3
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.9
7.3
8.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.8
4.4
4.2
4.1
4.3
23.3
23.5
24.8
22.3
21.9
20.7
21.2
20.3
19.4
18.6
19.1
18.5
21.1
18.0
22.9
19.6
19.0
17.1
16.8
17.0
15.2
15.5
12.1
11.2
14.1
14.0
10.8
9.6
27.2
27.3
28.9
26.0
25.5
24.2
24.8
23.7
—
—
—
—
24.6
20.9
26.7
22.8
—
—
—
—
17.7
18.0
--
—
16.4
16.3
—
—
15.7
16.4
16.7
16.2
7.5
8.3
7.7
8.3
11.3
11.2
11.6
11.4
7.3
6.7
7.5
8.2
10.4
11.2
10.4
11.6
4.8
4.9
6.:5
6.9
2.4
6.0
5.5
6.0
—
—
—
—
8.5
9.8
9.0
9.7
12.8
12.1
12.6
12.8
8.2
9.7
9.6
9.5
12.6
11.4
11.1
11.8
5.9
6.4
8.0
7.4
3.3
4.2
7.1
6.3
3-3
-------
a. Space Heating
The report on residential appliance gas consumption in
Lincoln, Sioux Falls, Minneapolis, and Omaha by the Northern Natural Gas
(NNG) Company [13] contains the results of actual measurements of the con-
sumption of gas for space heating in single-family dwellings. Their anal-
ysis resulted in the values of gas consumption per square foot degree day
shown below.
Size of Dwelling
'(sq.ft.)
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Gas, cubic feet/sq.ft.-d.d.
0.0214
0.0181
0.0159
0.0143
0.0131
0.0122
0.0115
Gas, Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
22.08
18.68
16.40
14.76
13.52
12.59
11.87
This is based on the following equation, derived by regression analysis on
their sample,
Gas consumption, Btu = -40,572,100 + (18,614.3*ht.d.d.) + (36,000*sq.ft.)
These data show a lower consumption than the estimate derived from the
Project Independence study, 20.3 British thermal units per square foot degree
day for a 1600 square foot dwelling.
The Hittman Associates report [14] estimated the annual heat-
ing requirement of a characteristic house in the Baltimore area to be 710
therms. At 4600 degree days and a finished floor area of 1695 square feet,
this represents 9.106 British thermal units per square foot degree day of
heat requirement. Hittman Associates then assumed a 70 percent efficiency to
obtain a gas requirement of 1014 therms, or 13.0 Btu/square foot degree day.
At 1032 Btu/cu.ft., this represents 0.0126 cubic foot per square foot degree
day; this compares very favorably with the Northern Natural Gas data.
3-4
-------
Community residential gas sales figures were obtained from
several gas companies. The gas distribution companies listed below pro-
vided data.
Company
Year of Data
States Served
San Diego Gas and Electric
Public Service Company of
Colorado
Pacific Gas and Electric
Rochester Gas and Electric
Baltimore Gas and Electric
Boston Gas
East Ohio Gas Company
Peoples Gas Company
1965-1973
1970, 1971,
1972, 1973
1973
1972, 1973
1972, 1973
1971, 1972, 1973
1972, 1973
1973
Southern Union Gas Company 1970, 1971
California
Colorado
California
New York
Maryland
Massachusetts
Ohio
Nebraska, Iowa,
Minnesota, Kansas
Arizona, Texas,
New Mexico,
Colorado
The listed gas companies provided Walden with the total natural gas consump-
tion and number of customers in approximately one thousand communities.
This was reduced to a sample of 278 cities, towns, and counties which con-
tained a reporting weather station. A scatter diagram of degree days and
therms per housing unit is shown in Figure 3*1. Each occurrence of a '!'
represents a single observation while a number other than 'V indicates
more than one observation at that point. Based on the relative proportion
of gas customers with other gas appliances [15] and the estimated consumption
of these appliances,* the average gas consumption per customer for space
heat was estimated. The regression of space heat therms per dwelling units
on degree days produced:
Therms per dwelling unit = 747.2 + .1050 * ht.d.d.
IT = .344
F (1,223) = 100
At 5000 degree days and 1600 square feet, this is approximately 16 British
thermal units per square foot degree day.
*See following section on residential process energy consumption.
3-5
-------
Y 2500
A
X
I
S 2250
2000
1750
1500
1250
1000
750
500
250
2000 " UOOO 6000" POOO ', 10000 12000
:=|=========|=========|=========|=========|=========
1
• 11
• •••!•••• !••• ,jLI ••*•!•••• | ••*•
11.
.1
. . i- i .
• •••(••••(••»j.|*«t« [••••{•••«
i. . . *
i . *
11 . .1*
11 i. . .*
• • • • | • • • t I • » * • | • • ' • JL • J. • • • •!*• • • •
11211 1 *
11 2111 2. 1 .1 *
11211 .1 1.1
1 . 2 1322 1 12 *.
.... I 1 ... I ... 1 1 321 1 . I .... I ....
. 1 llll 24 * 1 . .
. 1 2122211 1 1
1 11 13 111 2 . 1
. 111. 22 .312.1 1 1
. ... I 1 11. . I . * .1.21 241 . . I . . . . I . . . .
. 1 11 1 *21 3111 1 .
. 4321 1.1 1.21.
..1152211112 11. 1
.1 244211 .1 11
. ... I * 441 1 11. ... I .1. .. I .... I ....
2*A 11 1 1 1 .111 1
1 1 1 11
.1 .12
*2 . 11 21
* 2/11 . 1
* 123 .11
• » •
111
11.
1
. I ..1.
Ill
• • • •
*••
•••
• • •
* • • • I • • »
• •»• |«**»|**«*|«««* [•••»|***«
= = = = = = === I === = = = = = = I = = = = = = !
2000
uooo
= =!= = =
6000
=i======
POOO
co
Q£
CO
I—I
-
UJ
i ii y i
UJ O
13 CO
UJ ZD
O O
u. cc
O UJ
o.
C3 CC.
-------
Finally, in Volume 13 of the AQMP Guidelines Series [16],
the EPA suggests the use of 17,000 British thermal units per single family
dwelling degree day in the subcounty allocation of residential fuels (and
emissions). The use of efficiencies of 80 percent and 75 percent for gas
and oil are suggested. We believe these to be too high for utilization
efficiencies. At efficiencies of 60 percent and 50 percent and an assumed
1600vsquare foot house, this represents approximately 18 and 21 British
thermal units per square foot degree day. For electric heat, with a utili-
zation efficiency of 1.0, this would be about 10.5 British thermal units
per square foot degree day.
The foregoing estimates are shown in Figure 3*2. The FEA
engineering estimates exceed the EPA estimate, the Hittman estimate, the
Walden sample and the Northern Natural Gas sample. Given the size of the
Wai den sample, we consider 16 British thermal units per square foot degree
day the best estimate of single family residential gas consumption. The
Northern Natural Gas sample can be discounted because of its sample size
and its origin in a high degree day area. Their results do suggest that
one should consider adjusting downward the selected 16 British thermal units
per square foot value in cold climates (e.g., above 7000 degree days) or
where the average dwelling unit size is significantly above 1600 square
feet. Correspondingly, the 16 British thermal units per square foot degree
day figure is probably unrepresentative of low degree day area.
Considering the data on gas, it is probable that the FEA
estimate for oil is also too high. The EPA figure is also high assuming
16 British thermal units per square foot degree days is the correct figure
for gas. Assuming it is correct, and assuming utilization efficiencies of
.6 and .5, the corresponding estimate for oil would be:
16 ^|= 19.2
The FEA figure for electric heat will be used, approximately
8 Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
3-7
-------
25
20
•
•o
1
£ 15
•
O-
3
•!->
CO
10
5
1
•
<
NE •
NC '
S .
' W '
4
i
1 1
•EPA ,
FEA
»
4
4
i
FEA ,
^
i
EPA
• HITTMAN
• WALOEN
, NNG:
•
1 FEA.
• EPA
-..
-
t-
Ul
=3
U.
CO
a
z
Ul
o
0
cc
UJ
Ul
o
HH
1—
Ul
Ul
o
a_
CO
-------
b. Air Conditioning Central
The Hlttman report [14] estimates an annual cooling require-
ment of 282 therms for the same characteristic house 1n the Baltimore area.
At 1058 cooling degree days and 1695 square feet, this is equivalent to
15.725 British thermal units per square foot degree day or, at 1000 operat-
ing hours,* 16.6 British thermal units per square foot hour. This is higher
than the Project Independence estimate of 11.3 British thermal units per
square foot hour. No other relevant data on central air conditioning energy
consumption was readily available. Admittedly, there is little basis for
using either figure, however, the selection of a number is not critical
since central air conditioning represents a relatively small proportion of
residential energy consumption (about 5 percent of total residential energy
consumption [12]). We have selected FEA Project Independence figures.
c. Air Conditioning, Room
The electricity demand due to room air conditioners can be
approximated [17] by:
air conditioner capacity * compressor operating hours
* 3
seasonal energy efficiency ratios (EER)
The 1970, the average nameplate EER of units in place is
reported to be six [12]. We estimate the actual seasonal EER to be about
7 based on reference [17]. The average capacity of units shipped from manu-
facturers in the first nine months of 1971 is 12,300 British thermal units
[17]. Therefore, the average energy consumption per room air conditioner
would be approximately:
Btu = 12,300 * operating hours * 1
*See Figure 1-3; the operating hours on this figure are approximately the
same as the cooling hours used in the Hittman report.
3-9
-------
Btu = 1757.14 * operating hours
or the annual Btu consumption per unit operating hour is:
operating hour
or .51 kWh per operating hour
d. Process Use
The Northern Natural Gas study reported the following
consumption for gas appliances:
Occupants
2
3 (Average)
4
5
6
7
8
Water Heater Load, cu.ft.
33,702
36,588
39,473
42,358
45,244
48,129
51,014
Dryer Load, du.ft.
4,461
5,582
6,702
7,822
8,942
10,062
11,183
In addition, they reported a mean load for gas ranges of 8,249 cu.ft., of
which 4,256 cu.ft., was for the pilot light.
The American Gas Association reports the following averages
[]8] (in units of cubic feet):
3-10
-------
Region
New England
Middle Atlantic
East North
Central
West North
Central
South Atlantic
East South
Central
West South
Central
Mountain
Pacific
U.S. Average
Water
Heater
23,474
30,846
30.749
33,077
34,726
27,839
30,943
25,317
31,913
30,652
Dryer
Gas Pilot
8,924
6,305
6,693
7,275
6,402
5,820
8,051
11,640
7,760
7,275
Dryer
Electric Pilot
7,372
6,305
5,626
5,044
3,880
6,111
6,111
7,469
5,238
5,820
Range
9,797
11,349
9,797
8,439
9,215
12,319
10,864
9,991
9,894
10,185
Hittman Associates estimated the following process energy
use for the characteristic single-family dwelling in the Baltimore area [14];
Hot water,heating
Dryer
Range
Refrigerator
Lights
Television
Clothes washer
Dishwasher
Miscellaneous
26,162 cu.ft. gas
3,876 cu.ft. gas
4,844 cu.ft. gas
4,399 kWh electricity
990 kWh electricity
1,173 kWh electricity
1,833 kWh
1,998 kWh
494 kWh
101 kWh
367 kWh
2,324 kWh
3-11
-------
The University of Oklahoma reports the following figures [19]:
hot water, gas
hot water, electricity
hot water, oil
cooking, gas
cooking, electric
2.7 * 107 Btu/dwelling unit
4.62 * 107 Btu/dwell ing unit
3.46 * 107 Btu/dwelling unit
1.1 * 107 Btu/dwelling unit
1.2 * 107 Btu/dwelling unit
Based on these figures, the process energy consumption has been estimated as
shown tn Table 3-3. Table 3-3 also summarizes space heattng & atr conditioning
energy demand estimates.
2. Single Family Attached Dwelling Units
On the basis of the close correspondence between the single
family attached and single family detached energy consumption estimates in
the FEA study [12], we have assumed the values in Table 3-3, to be equally
applicable to single family attached housing.
3. Mobile Home Dwelling Units
Data on energy consumption in mobile homes is limited. Due to
the lack of better estimate, we have elected to use the FEA estimates for
space heat and air conditioning. Process energy consumption has been
assumed to be the same as single family detached housing. These values are
summarized In Table 3-4.
4. Multifamily Low Rise Residential
As described in Section III.A, the Federal Energy Administration
(FEA) Project Independence [12] estimated energy consumption in multifamily
low rise dwelling units. The parameters they used are summarized in Table
3-5, and the resulting estimates tn Table 3-6.
3-12
-------
CO
I
TABLE 3-3
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity
Spaceheat;
Air conditioning;
Hot water;
Cooking;
Miscellaneous
electricity
gas
oil
central electricity
central , gas
room, electric
electricity
gas
oil
electricity
gas
electricity
Btu/ Measure
8
16
19
10
11
1.
4
3
3
1
1
2
.0
.0
.2
.0
.0
757
.6 *
.0 *
.5 *
.2 *
.1 *
.7 *
Measure
square foot •
square foot •
square foot •
square foot •
square foot •
heating
heating
heating
heating
heating
a.c. untt • operating
107
107
107
10?
107
107
dwelling unit
dwelling unit
dwelling unit
dwelling unit
dwelling unit
dwelling unit
• year
• year
• year
• year
• year
• year
degree
degree
degree
degree
degree
hour
day
day
day
day
day
Notes: A 1600 square foot house is assumed. Air conditioner operating hours are from Figure 1-3,
Electricity consumption is at point of entry; it does not include transmission and genera-
tion losses.
-------
CO
TABLE 3-4
MOBILE HOME ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activi
Spaceheat;
Air conditioning;
Hot water;
Cooking;
Miscellaneous
ty
electricity
gas (or LPG)
oil
central, electricity
room, electric
electricity
gas (or LPG)
oil
electricity
gas (or LPG)
electricity
Btu/Measure
11.0
23.0
27.0
16
1,757
4.6 * 107
3.0 * 107
3.5 * 107
1.2 * 107
1.1 * 107
2.7 * 107
Measure
square foot- heating degree day
square foot • heating degree day
square foot • heating degree day
square foot • heating- degree day
a. c. unit • operating hour
dwelling unit* year
dwelling unit* year
dwelling unit* year
dwelling unit* year
dwelling unit* year
dwelling unit* year
Note: Air conditioning operating hours are from Figure 1-3. Electricity consumption is at point of
entry; it does not include transmission and generation losses.
A 720 square feet per dwelling unit is assumed.
-------
TABLE 3-5
FEA DESIGN PARAMETERS
FEA Design Parameters
Square feet/dwell Ing unit
NE
NC
S
w
Low Rise
900
900
900
900
High Rise ht.d.d.
900
900
900
900
5400
6200
2800
3800
Operating
Hours
300
bOO
1600
1600
cl.d.d.
729
684
2000
1600
3-15
-------
TABLE 3-6
FEA LOW RISE MULTI-FAMILY ESTIMATES
Region
North North South
East Central
West
Space heating, electric
MM Btu/unit year 23.8 27.1
Btii/sq.ft.-ht.d.d. 4.9 4.9
Btu/unit-ht.d.d. 4407 4371
Space heating, gas
MM Btu/unit-year 73.8 86.3
Btu/sq.ft.-ht.d.d. 15.2 15.5
Btu/unit-ht.d.d. 13667 13919
Space heating, oil
MM Btu/unit-year 86.1 100.7
Btu/sq.ft.-ht.d.d. 17.7 18.0
Btu/unit-ht.d.d. 15944 16242
Air conditioning, electric
MM Btu/unit-year 1.3 2.2
Btu/sq.ft.-cl.d.d. 2.0 3.6
Btu/unit-cl.d.d. 1783 3216
Air conditioning, gas/oil
MM Btu/unit-year 1.6 2.9
Btu/sq.ft.-cl.d.d. 2.4 4.7
Btu/unit-cl.d.d. 2195 4240
12.3
4.9
4394
30.5
12.1
10893
9.3
5.2
4650
11.5
6.4
5750
16.5
4.8
4342
38.4
11.2
10105
9.9
6.9
6188
10.7
7.4
6688
3-16
-------
a. Space Heating
Hittman Associates, using the same time-response method
employed in the single-family energy consumption study, calculated the fol low-
estimate of low rise multi family gas space heating energy consumption [20]:
Sq.Ft. Therms/Sq.Ft. Btu/Sq.Ft.-ht.d.d. , Gas Btu/Unit-ht.d.d.
1,120 0.419 9.11 10200
This is lower than the FEA Project Independence estimates.
Wai den Research obtained a complete set of Electric Heating
Association (EHA) case studies [21]. Each case study reported monthly elec-
tricity consumption of a specific all electric building. Fourteen of these
case studies were low rise apartment buildings. The regression of monthly
kilowatt-hours per low rise apartment on the monthly heating and cooling
degree days provided the following results*:
= 476.8 + 1.292 * ht.d.d. + 1.108 * cl.d.d.
unit-month
R2 = .32 F (2,165) = 39.5
This can be restated in Btu's, viz.,
= 1626842 - — + 4408
unit-month unit-month unit-ht.d.d.
+ 3780 §tu
unit-cl.d.d.
The 4408 British thermal unit per unit-heating degree day compares favorably
with the FEA estimates. Note that the 3780 British thermal unit per unit
cooling degree day also compares favorably.
*Results of the regression analysis on the EHA data is summarized in Appendix
C.
3-17
-------
TABLE 3-7
COMPARISON OF RELEVANT FEA, EHA, AND HITTMAN DATA
Space heating, Electric
Average FEA 4373 Btu/unit-ht.d.d.
EHA regression 4408 Btu/unit-ht.d.d.
Space heating, Gas
FEA, South 10893 Btu/unit-ht.d.d.
Hittman 10200 Btu/unit-ht.d.d.
FEA, South 12.1 Btu/sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
Hittman 9.1 Btu/sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
3-18
-------
Comparable values of all three data sources are summarized
in Table 3-7. Overall, they compare rather well. We have elected to use
the average of the FEA regional estimates for space heating in low rise
multifamily dwelling units.
b. Air Conditioning, Central
Hittman Associates estimated the electricity requirements
for the same characteristic Baltimore apartments. The calculated per square
foot cooling degree day and per unit cooling degree day requirements are
shown below.
Sq.Ft. Therms/Sq.Ft. Btu/Sq.Ft.-cl.d.d. Btu/unit-cl.d.d.
1120 0.093 8.79 9900
This is substantially higher than the FEA estimate of 4650 British thermal
units cooling degree days estimate for the Southern Region.
As discussed in the previous section, regression analysis
of EHA data provided an estimate of 3780 British thermal units cooling degree
days. This is .near the mean, 3959, of the widely spread FEA data.
We" have elected to use the mean of the regional FEA data.
As with single family housing, we have used the estimated annual operating
hours rather than degree days as the denominator, as reported in Table 3-8.
c. Air Conditioning, Room
The per unit operating hours energy requirements of room air
conditioners in low rise multifamily housing is assumed to be the same as the
single family detached housing per unit operating hours requirement.
d. Process Energy Requirements
The Hittman Associates study [20] estimated process energy
requirements per dwelling unit-year as follows:
3-19
-------
Water Heater Cooking and Clothes Dryer Miscellaneous Total
Gas Gas
Therms 120 Therms 4300 kWh
2.4 * 107 Btu 1.2 * 107 Btu 1.5 * 107 Btu 5.1 * 107 Btu
The constant in the EHA regression analysis is 476.8 kWh
per dwelling unit per month. On an annual basis this is 5722 kWh or 1.9
* 107 Btu. This is significantly less than the Hittman estimate.
We have elected to use the Hittman estimate, as it appears
to be reasonable when compared with the previous estimates for process
energy consumption in single family housing. Energy consumption for electric
water heating and cooking is derived by using the efficiencies implied in
the same uses in single family housing. Energy consumption for low rise
multi -family housing is summarized in Table 3-8.
5. Highrise Multi-family Residential
The FEA Project Independence estimates of energy consumption
in high rise multi-family residential buildings are shown in Table 3-9.
a. Space Heating
Hittman Associates, using the same time response method
employed in the single-family energy consumption study, calculated the follow-
ing estimates of multifamily gas space heating energy consumption [20]:
Sq.Ft. Therms/Sq.Ft. Btu/Sq.Ft.-ht.d.d., Gas Btu/Apt.-ht.d.d.
972 0.399 8.67 8400
This is substantially lower than the Project Independence estimates.
Gordian Associates, in Environmental Impact of Electric vs.
Fossil Fuel Space Heating for the Welfare Island Development Project,
3-20
-------
TABLE 3-8
LOW RISE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity
Btu/Measure
CO
I
ro
Space heat; electricity 4380
gas 12150
oil 16100
Air conditioning; central, electricity 5700
central, gas or oi1 6800
room, electric 1757
Hot water; electricity 3.7 * 107
gas 2.4 * 107
oil 2.8 * 107
Cooking & Clothes 7
Dryer; electricity 1.3 * 10
gas 1.2 * 107
Miscellaneous: electricity 1.5*10
dwelling unit - ht.d.d.
dwelling unit - ht.d.d.
dwelling unit - ht.d.d.
dwelling unit - operating hour
dwelling unit - operating hour
a.c. unit - operating hour
dwelling unit - year
dwelling unit - year
dwelling unit - year
dwelling unit - year
dwelling unit - year
dwelling unit - year
Note: A 900 square foot dwelling unit assessment; air conditioner opera-
ting hours are from Figure 1-3.
Electricity consumption is at point of entry; it does not include
transmission and generation losses.
-------
TABLE 3-9
FEA HIGH-RISE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ESTIMATES
Space heating, electric
MM Btu/unit year
Btu/sq/ft.-ht.d.d.
Btu/unit-ht.d.d.
Space heating, gas
MM Btu/ unit-year
Btu/sq.ft-ht.d.d.
Btu/unit-ht.d.d.
Space heating, oil
MM Btu/unit-year
Btu/sq/ft.-ht.d.d.
Btu/unit-ht.d.d.
Air conditioning, electric
Electric space heater
MM Btu/unit-year
Btu/sq.ft.-cl.d.d.
Btu/unit-cT.d.d.
Btu/unit-operating hour
Air conditioning, electric
Gas or oil spaceheat
MM Btu/unit-year
Btu/sq.ft.-cl.d.d.
Btu/unit-cl .d.d.
Btu/unit-operating hour
NE
21.2
4.36
3926
68.3
14.1
12648
79.6
16.4
14741
1.1
1509
1.68
3667
1.5
2.29
2058
5000
North Central
23.3
4.18
3758
78.1
14.0
12597
91.1
16.3
14694
2.7
3947
4.39
5400
1.9
3.09
2778
3800
South
10.4
4.13
3714
27.1
10.8
9679
7.9
3950
4.39
4938
10.2
5.67
5100
6375
West
14.6
4.27
. 3842
32.8
9.6
8632
8.7
5437
6.04
5437
9.1
6.32
5687
5687
3-22
-------
obtained energy consumption data for 18 electrically heated apartment
buildings in the eastern Untted States and Canada. The consumption data
in this report are summarized and the Bt
-------
TABLE 3-10
ELECTRIC ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR SPACE HEATING
IN 18 APARTMENT BUILDINGS
Building
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
# of Apts.
495
435
500
201
200 ,
60
45
117
126
86
60
90
394
122
205
64
48
46
Degree-
days
4,360
4,360
4,360
7,060
6,210
6,190
6,600
6,583
5,745
4,987
4,620
8,200
8,200
8,200
8,200
9,200
8,200
8,100
Space Heat Use
kwh x 103
4,116
2,999
4,745
600
601
168
229
765
736
295
139
503
5,800
658
555
318
143
244
BTU per
Apt.-dd
6,510
5,397
7,429
1,443
1,652
1,550
2,633
3,389
3,472
2,344
1,706
2,324
6,126
2,246
1,127
1,840
1,241
2,234
KWH per
Degree-day
944
688
1,088
85
97
27
35
116
128
59
30
61
707
80
68
35
17
30
Average Bt&per Apt.-dd: 3,037 B'ty per apt.-dd
Average kwh per degree-day divided by number of apts., converted to Btu:
4,452 Btu per apt.-dd
3-24
-------
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
?
ERA
GORDIAN, H
FBA
GORDON ^ LC
••
.flAOiE^.
FtA($)
FtACW)
• H^TTWIAN
GH
W
FftA(HE,l|C)
,
Elec.
Gas
Oil
FIGURE 3-3. COMPILATION OF HIGH RISE MULTIFAMILY HEATING
ESTIMATES
3-25
-------
per square foot-cooling degree day requirements calculated from these
requirements are shown below:
Sq.Ft.
972
Therms/Sq.Ft.
0.052
Btu/sq/ft.-cl.d.d.
4.915
Btu/unit-cl.d.ld.
4700
The estimate of per unit electricity requirements derived
from regression analysis of the EHA case studies is 3780 British thermal
units per dwelling unit-cooling degree day.
The EHA regression estimate is relatively close to the
mean of the FEA engineering estimates, 3808. The Hittman Associates'
estimate is approximately 20% above the FEA and EHA estimates. We find an
estimate of 3800 British thermal units per dwelling unit cooling degree
day the most reasonable. To maintain consistancy with the other residen-
tial air conditioning energy factors, we have elected to use the mean of the
FEA estimates in terms of operating hours, (i.e., 5216 British thermal
units per dwelling unit operating hour).
c. Air Conditioning, Room
It is assumed the energy requirements of room air condi-
tioners is identical to those in single family room units.
d. Process Energy Requirements
The Hittman Associates estimate of process requirements is
as follows:
Water Heater
Gas
per dwelling unit year
Cooking and Miscellaneous
Clothes Dryer, Gas
Total
144 therms
1.4 x 107 Btu
120 therms
1.2 x 107 Btu
4464 kWh
2.0 x 107 Btu
4.6 * 10' Btu
3-26
-------
The regression analysis of the EHA data estimated a con-
stant of 493.9 kWh per unit month or 2 x 10 British thermal units per
dwelling unit year.
We have elected to use the Hittman estimates in order to
be consistent with the low rise multi-family process energy requirements.
Energy consumption for electric water heating and cooking is derived by us-
ing the efficiencies implied in these uses in single family housing. Energy
consumption factors for high rise multi-family housing is summarized in
Table 3-11. Note that it is plausable that the EHA regression estimate of
process requirement be too low, as the energy factor for space heating that
was.estimated from the EHA data was higher than the other estimates.
3-27
-------
TABLE 3-11
HIGH RISE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION FACTORS
Activity
Btu/Measure
Measure
CO
ro
oo
Space heat; electricity
gas
oil
Air conditioning; central, electricity
room, electricity
Hot water electricity
gas
oil
Cooking & Clothes
Dryer; electricity
Miscellaneous;
gas
electricity
3,940
10,400
14,700
5,200
1,757
2.1 * 107
1.4 * 107
1.6 * 107
1.3 * 107
1.2 * 107
2.0 * 107
Btu per dwelling unit • heating degree day
Btu per dwelling unit • heating degree day
Btu per dwelling unit • heating degree day
Btu per dwelling unit • operating hour
Btu per air conditioner • operating hour
Btu per dwelling unit • year
Btu per dwelling unit • year
Btu per dwelling unit • year
Btu per dwelling unit • year
Btu per dwelling unit • year
Btu per dwelling unit • year
Note A 900 square foot dwelling unit is assumed.
from Figure 1-3. Electricity consumption is
transmission and generation losses.
Air conditioner operating hours are
at point of entry; it does not include
-------
B. COMMERCIAL - INSTITUTIONAL
The validity of estimates of average energy requirements of vari-
ous categories of buildings in the commercial - institutional sector must
be treated with more circumspection than the residential estimates discussed
in the previous section. Residential heating and central cooling systems
are basically the same, and while residential construction is not identical
'among individual structures or regions of the country, it is reasonably
similar within certain limits. Indeed, a large part of the variation in
dwelling unit energy demands could be attributed to occupant lifestyle vari-
ation. In the commercial - institutional sector, there is a wide variation
not only among buildings within a particular category, but also among
heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems.
1. Retail Establishments
The FEA Project Independence study £12] estimated the energy
demand of a typical retail establishment in each of four regions. The
typical establishment was defined to be a 67,000 square foot, single story
surburban mall-type shopping center. The estimated energy demand for this
type of structure is shown in Table 3-12, along with the energy consumption
per square foot-degree day indices implicit in these estimates.
a. Space heating
The 1958 ASHRAE Handbook [29] reports the steam demand
for various retail buildings in units of British thermal units per cubic
foot heating degree days. Assuming a ten foot floor to ceiling height,
they reported 3.85 British thermal units per square foot heating degree days
for department stores and 6.24 British thermal units per square foot
heating degree days for other stores.
The Georgia Power Company 123] reports an energy demand
for supermarkets of 5.12 British thermal units per square foot heating
degree days for electric space heat and 12.62 British thermal units per
square foot heating degree days for gas space heat.
3-29
-------
TABLE 3-12
FEA ESTIMATES OF RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS ENERGY DEMAND
Spaceheatlng
Electricity Gas Oil
Demand:
Demand: Btu/sq.ft - d.d.
Northeast
North Central
South
West
Air Conditioning
Electricity
MBtu/sq.ft. year
Northeast
North Central
South
West
22
26
14
16
52
62
25
31
63
73
30
38
12.2
12.2
29,2
19.0
4.07
4.19
5.00
4.21
9.63
10.00
8.93
8.16
11.67
11.77
10.71
10.00
20.33
24.40
14.60
12.00
3-30
-------
Regression analysis on retail building energy consumption
in the EHA sample [21] estimated electric demand at 4.78 British thermal
units per square foot heating degree days, plus or minus 1.95 British ther-
mal units per square foot heating degree days at a 95% confidence level. The
electrical space heating demand for retail establishments less than 50,000
square feet, 50,000 to 100,000 square feet, and over 100,000 square feet were
found not to be significantly different.
In volume 13 of the AQMP Guidelines £16], the EPA has esti-
mated the average heating requirement of commercial-institutional structures
as follows:
Floor Area Heating Requirement
(103 sq.ft.) (106 Btu/ht.d.d.)
0-20 1.53
20-50 1.80
50-100 2.24
100+ 3.07
Taking the midpoint of each floor area range (i.e. 10,35,75,and, say 150),
the heating requirement in units of British thermal units per square foot
heating degree day can be estimated:
Floor Area Heating Requirement
(103 sq.ft.) (Btu/sq.ft.-ht.d.d.)
0-20 153
20-50 51
50-100 29
100+ 20
These are so much higher than the FEA, EHA9 and the Georgia Power Company
estimates (of electric space heat energy demand) that we question their credi-
bility. It is possible that the EPA values include air conditioning and pro-
cess energy demand.
3-31
-------
The mean of the four FEA electric estimates is 4.4 while
the EHA estimate is slightly higher at 4.8. There is little basis on which
to select either one, so we have elected to use the average of the four FEA
estimates, the EHA estimate, and the Georgia Power estimate. This is
approximately 4.5 British thermal units per square foot per heating degree
days for electric space heat. Gas and oil demand indices were selected in
a corresponding manner.
b. Air Conditioning
The EHA sample regression analysis yielded an estimate of
8.87 British thermal units per square foot cooling degree day for air
conditioning energy consumption. This is substantially lower than the
FEA estimates shown in Table 3-12.
As the EHA estimate is lower than the estimates of air
conditioning energy demand in single family structures, we have chosen to
discount it and, have instead, elected to use the average of the FEA
regional estimates, 17.8 British thermal units per square foot cooling
degree day.
c. Process Energy Consumption
The FEA Project Independence estimates of process demand is
shown below; in units of British thermal units per square foot per year.
Lighting 27,200
Auxiliary Equipment 12,200
Appliances 6,800
Hot Water:
Electricity H7QO
Gas 2,400
Oil 3,400
Refrigeration 30.400
Total Process
78,000 - 80,000
This compares well with the estimate of process energy
demand derived from the EHA sample, 77793 British thermal units per square
3-32
-------
foot per year. We have elected to use the FEA estimates; energy demand in
retail .establishments 1s summarized 1n Table 3-13.
2. Office Buildings
The FEA Project Independence Study [12] estimated the energy
demand of a typical office building in each of four regions. The typical
building was defined to be a 40,000 square foot, three story building.
The estimated energy demand for this type of structure is shown in Table
3-14, together with the energy consumption per square foot degree day ;
indices implicit in these estimates.
Regression analysis of data supplied by the Building Owner's
and Managers Association (BOMA) yielded:*
Btu.. = 95,468 + 6.6 * ht.d.d. + 5.2 * cl.d.d.
SC| • T t •
While regression analysis of the EHA sample yielded
= 76,155 + 3.9 * ht.d.d. + 2.9 * cl.d.d.
SCJ • T t •
Analysis of both the BOMA and EHA samples showed no significant differences
in energy consumption in buildings of various size classes (i.e., less than
50,000 square feet, 50,000 to 100,000 square feet, and over 100,000 square
feet of floor area.
The BOMA sample consists of 74.9 X 106 square feet of office
building. In the FEA study [12], Arthur D. Little estimated the national
inventory of office buildings at 3,380 X 10 square feet. Accordingly, the
BOMA sample represents approximately a 2 percent sample of the population.
p
Despite the low R on the BOMA regression, it should be a better predictor
of total energy consumption in office buildings than the FEA engineering
estimates or the EHA sample (which is a smaller sample, .07 percent, and
only all electric buildings).
*A detailed discussion of the regression analysis of the BOMA data can be
found in Appendix B.
3-33
-------
TABLE 3-13
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity Energy Consumption Measure
per Measure
Space heat:
electricity 4.5 sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
gas 9.8 sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
oil 11.0 sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
Air Conditioning, Electricity 17.8 sq.ft.-cl .d.d.
Hot Water:
electricity 1,706 sq.ft.-year
gas 2,400 sq.ft.-year
oil 3,400 sq.ft.-year
Lighting 27,200 sq.ft..year
Auxiliary Equipment 12,200 sq.ft.*year
Appliances 6,800 sq.ft.'year
(other than refrigeration)
Refrigeration 30,400 sq.ft.*year
3-34
-------
TABLE 3-14
FEA ESTIMATE OF OFFICE BUILDING ENERGY DEMAND
Space Heating Air Conditioning
Electricity Gas Oil Electricity
Demand: MBtu/sq.ft.-yr.
North east
North central
South
West
Demand: Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
North east
North central
South
West
44
51
24
25
8.15
8.23
8.57
6.58
96 113
113 113
59 71
61 72
17.78 20.93
18.23 18.23
21.07 25.3
16.05 18.95
10.9
10.9
25.5
16.0
18.2
21.8
12.8
10.0
Process Use:
Lighting
25,
Auxiliary Equipment 7»
Appliances
Hot Water:
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Data Processing
Equipment
Total Process 43
6,
3,
4,
6,
,210-45
500 Btu/sq.ft.«year
500 Btu/sq.ft.-year
100 Btu/ sq.ft. -year
Btu/sq.ft.°year
400 Btu/sq.ft.*year
800 Btu/ sq.ft. °year
800 Btu/sq.ft.'year
710 Btu/sq.ft.°year
,610 Btu/sq.ft.°year
3-35
-------
Conversely, the FEA estimates are probably better Indicators
of the relative demands due to space heating, air conditioning, and process
use. While the BOMA regression is the best estimate of the variation in
energy consumption per square foot due to variation in heating and cooling
degree days, the separate terms in the regression should not be strictly
construed as process, space heating, and air conditioning demand. The
constant term in the BOMA regression reflects the portion of space heating
and air conditioning demand that was constant in the regression.
The ability to distinguish among the three components of
energy demand is important if they are supplied by different fuels. The
percentage of the total energy demand in the BOMA sample met by each fuel
type is tabulated below:
Energy Source Percentage of Total Energy Supply
Electricity 64%
Steam 18%
Gas 12%
Oil 6%
Coal and Chilled Water Negligible
Given the distribution, it is apparent that it is not critical to distinguish
among the three components of energy consumption. Accordingly, we have
elected to use the BOMA regression analysis coefficients for the office
building energy consumption factors. These are summarized in Table 3-15.
3. Warehouse and Wholesaling Establishments
Explicit data on energy consumption in warehousing and whole-
saling establishments are very limited. The only data available to this study
are space heating consumption reported in the 1958 ASHRAE Handbook [29], viz.,
3-36
-------
TABLE 3-15
OFFICE BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity
Btu per measure
Measure
Space heating
Electricity, Steam 6.6
Gas 9.4
Oil 11.0
Air Conditioning
Electricity, Steam 5.2
Gas 7.4
Oil 8.6
Process 95,468
Square foot-heating degree day
Square foot-heating degree day
Square foot-heating degree day.
Square foot-cooling degree day
Square foot-cooling degree day
Square foot-cool ing degree day
Square foot*year
3-37
-------
Building Type
Warehouses
Stores
Department Stores
Sample Size
24
73
63
Space heat, Btu/cu.ft.^ht.d.d.
0.459
0.624
0.385
Assuming a fifteen foot ceiling height for department stores and warehouses,
and a ten foot ceiling height for other stores, the energy consumption per
square foot heating degree day would be:
Building Type Space heating, Btu/sq.ft.-ht.d.d.
Warehouses 5.78
Stores 6.24
Department. Stores 6,89
This tends to indicate that warehouse space heating demand is approximately
the same as retail establishments.
The FEA study £12] assumed that energy consumption in whole-
saling and warehousing buildings to be the same as retail establishments.
For lack of other data, we have been forced to follow their
precedent and make the same assumption. The 1958 ASHRAE data indicates
that this assumption is reasonable.
4. Hotels, Motels and Dormatories and Clubs
This category includes all non-housekeeping residential build-
ings. Two data sources were appropriate to the requirements of this study.
The first, the 1958 ASHRAE Handbook [24], indicated a space heating demand
of 0.99 British thermal units per cubic feet heating degree days for hotels
3-38
-------
and clubs. At a nine foot ceiling height,* this would be 9.0 British
thermal units per square foot heating degree days.
The second source is the regression analysis of the EHA
sample, viz.,
Btu/sq.ft. = 42172 + 5.63 ht.d.d. + 1.6 cl.d.d.
One can infer from the 1958 ASHRAE value that the 5.63 coefficient does not
include all space heating energy consumption, as was the case in the BOMA
office building regression.
We have elected to use the EHA regression coefficients as the
energy requirement factors for this category. Gas and oil consumption is
estimated by utilization efficiencies of, respectively., .7 and .6. These
factors are summarized in Table 3-16.
5. Hospitals
The FEA Project Independence Study [12] estimated the energy
demand of a typical hospital facility in each of four regions. The typical
establishment was defined to be a 60,000 square foot, four story hospital.
The estimated energy demand for this type of structure is shown in Table
3-17, along with the energy consumption per square foot degree day implicit
in these estimates.
Regression analysis of the EHA sample yielded:
Btu/sq.ft.-year 90486 + 8.33*ht.d.d. + 8.39*cl.d.d.
a. Space Heating
The EHA coefficient substantiates the FEA engineering
estimates.
*The average ceiling height for hotels, motels, and dormitories in the EHA
sample was 9 feet.
3-39
-------
TABLE 3-16
NON-HOUSEKEEPING RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity
Btu/Measure
Measure
Space heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Process
5.63
8.04
9.38
1.60
2.29
2.67
42,172
Square foot«heating degree day
Square foot-heating degree day
Square foot-heating degree day
Square foot«cool ing degree day
Square foot-cool ing degree day
Square foot-cool ing degree day
Square foot-year
3-40
-------
TABLE 3-17
FEA ESTIMATES OF HOSPITAL ENERGY DEMAND
Space
Electricity
Heattng
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Demand: MBtu/ sq.ft. year
North
North
South
West
Demand: Btu/sq
North
North
South
West
Mean
east
Centrla
.ft. d.d
east
Central
46
54
19
25
•
8.
8.
6.
6.
7.
52
71
79
58
65
103
121
51
63
19.07
19.52
18.21
16.58
18.35
122
143
61
76
22.59
23.06
21.79
20.00
21.86
13.
13.
34.
21.
22.
27.
17.
13.
20.
6
6
0
1
67
20
00
19
02
Process :
Lighting
Aitxil
iary
Equipment
Appliances
51 ,000
59,600
20,300
Hot Water:
Total
Electric
Gas
Oil
Process
17,000
24,000
34,000
147,900
- 164,900
Btu/sq. ft. -year
3-41
-------
b. Air Conditioning
The EHA coefficient indicates an air conditioning energy
demand 40% of the FEA estimates.
c. Process
The EHA coefficient indicates a process energy requirement
of 60% of the FEA estimate. Hittman Associates have estimated the process
energy demand at a characteristic hospital to be 137,400 British thermal
units per square feet per year £25]. This tends to support the FEA esti-
mate over the EHA coefficient.
We have elected to use the average of the FEA regional
estimates (as shown fn Table 3-17) for the energy requirement factors.
This decision is based on the relatively low values of the EHA air condition-
ing and process requirement coefficients when compared with other building
categories in the commercial-institutional sector. In addition, we note
the confirmation of the FEA data by the Hittman estimate.
6. Cultural Buildings
The category includes libraries, museums, and other miscellane-
ous buildings characterized as having longer than average operating hours*.
The only source of data for this building category is the
regression analysis of the EHA sample, viz.,
Btu/sq.ft.* 40,944 +(6.31*ht.d.d.)+(2.01*cl .d.d.)
*In the EHA sample, the mean hours per week a building was open is as fol
1 ows:
Office Building 61
Retail Establishments 63
Hospitals 130
Cultural Buildings 96
Schools 65
Hotels 168
Churches 49
3-42
-------
These values are summarized in Table 3-18, alony with estimates for
natural gas and fuel oil based on utilization efficiencies of respectively,
.7 and .6.
7. Churches
This category includes churches and other miscellaneous build-
ings characterized as having shorter than average operating hours.
The regression analysis of the EHA sample yielded;
Btu/sq.ft.= 14,166 + (lO°0*ht.,d.dO + 02»83*cl -d-d-)
This is supported by data in the 1958 ASHRAE Handbook [24] .
which reported a space heating demand in churches of 0.532 British thermal
units per cubic feet heating degree days. At the 16 foot ceiling height
in the EHA sample, this would be 8.5 British thermal units per square foot
heating degree days. While this is lower than the EHA estimate of 10.0, we
would expect that the ASHRAE data includes many older churches with ceiling
heights considerably higher than 16 feet.
Energy consumption in churches is summarized in Table 3-19.
Gas and oil factors were computed with .7 and ,6 utilization efficiencies.
8. Schools
The FEA Project Independence study [12] estimated the energy
consumption of a typical school building. The typical building was defined
to be a 40,000 square foot, single story building. The energy demand of this
building in each of four regions is shown in Table 3-20, along with the
per square foot degree day energy consumption implicit in these estimates.
The regression analysis of the EHA sample yielded:
Btu/sq.ft.= 24;326 + (5.63*ht.d.d.) + (1.60*cl.d.d.)
3-43
-------
TABLE 3-18
CULTURAL BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity
Space heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Process
Btu/Measure
6.31
9.01
10.52
2.01
2.87
3.35
40,944
Measure
Square foot- heating degree day
Square foot* heating degree day
Square foot* heating degree day
Square foot* cool ing degree day
Square foot- cool ing degree day
Square foot- cool ing degree day
Square foot- year
TABLE 3-19
CHURCH BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity
Btu/Measure
Measure
Space Heating
Electricity 10.00
Gas 14.29
Oil 16.67
Air Conditioning
Electricity 12.83
Gas 18.33
Oil 21.38
Process 14,166
Square foot*heating degree day
Square foot°heating degree day
Square foot0heating degree day
Square foot" cool ing degree day
Square foot-cooling degree day
Square foot-cooling degree day
Square foot-year
3-44
-------
TABLE 3-20
FEA ESTIMATES OF SCHOOL BUILDING ENERGY DEMAND
Space Heating Air Conditioning
Electricity Gas Oil Electricity
Demand: MBtu/sq.ft.-year
North east
North Central
South
West
Demand: Btu/sq.ft.-d.d. . ;
North east ,
North Central
South
. West • -.•
Mean
40
46
18
23
•7,41.
7.42
6.43
6.05
6.83
85 100 9.2
99 117 9.2
44 52 20.4
54 64 11.9
15.74 18.52 15.33
15.97 18.87 18.40
15.71 18.57 10.20
14.21 16.84 7.44
15.41 18.20 12.84
Process: . Lighting
Auxiliary Equipment
Appliances
Hot Water
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Total Process 41,800
22,100
11,200
5,100
3,400
4,800
6,800
- 45,200
Btu/sq.ft.»year
Btu/sq.ft.-year
Btu/sq/ft.«year
Btu/sq.ft.-year
Btu/sq.ft.«year
Btu/sq.ft.-year
Btu/sq.ft.-year
Btu/sq.ft.-year
3-45
-------
The constant term, the coefficient of heating degree days, and
the coefficient of cooling degree days are all less than the respective
FEA estimates.
Several other data sources on measured energy consumption
1n schools 1s summarized In Table 3-21. In general, they are smaller than
and thus tend to support the 24,320 British thermal units per square foot
per year estimate of process use from the EHA sample over the FEA estimate
of 42,000-45,000. The electric space heating indices in Table 3-21 also
support the EHA estimate over the FEA estimate.
There is considerable difference between the FEA estimate and
the estimate from the EHA sample of air conditioning energy demand. There
is little additional data on which way to resolve this conflict. The FEA
estimate does assume full operation of the, school in the summer, while the
estimate from the EHA estimate may reflect a more accurate limited operation
of the school buildings. For this reason, and because the FEA estimate of
the other two components of energy consumption were judged too high, we have
elected to use the estimates derived from the EHA data. These data are
summarized in Table 3-22, along with estimates for gas and oil heated
buildings.
3-46
-------
TABLE 3-21
OTHER AVAILABLE DATA ON MEASURED ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN SCHOOLS
Robert Dillard [26]
Robert Dillard [27]
Empire District Electric Company [28]
Empire District Electric Company [28]
1958 ASHRAE Handbook [29]
Oak Ridge National Laboratory [24]
5 Electrically heated schools - New'England
Heating and ventilation 4.207 Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
Process -12,491 Btu/sq.ft.
15 Fossil Fuel heated schools - New England
Heating 31,56 Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
Process 14,894 Btu/sq.ft.
22 Electrically heated schools - Midwest
Heating and hot water 5.460 Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
Process 9,653 Btu/sq.ft.
52 Fossil fuel heated.schools r Midwest
Heating and hot water 20.13 Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
Process • 8,526 Btu/sq.ft.
8 Steam heated schools
Heating 0.592 Btu/cu.ft.-d.d.*
(at 10' ceilings: 5.92 Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.)
Estimated steam consumption,
Heating 7.106 Btu/sq.ft.-d.d.
*At 1,000 Btu/lb.
-------
TABLE 3-22
SCHOOL BUILDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Activity
Btu/Measure
Measure
Space Heating
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Air Conditioning
Electricity
Gas
Oil
Process
5.63
8.04
9.38
1.6
2.29
2.67
24,320
Square foot-heating degree day
Square foot'heating degree day
Square foot-heating degree day
Square foot-dooling degree day
Square foot-cooling degree day
Square foot-cooling degree day
Square foot-year
3-48
-------
C. INDUSTRIAL
The estimation and use of land use based emission factors for the
industrial sector presents severe problems. The potential variation in emis-
sion per square foot of floor area (or, at least, per acre of land) is
documented in reference 6. The estimation of emissions from a single indus-
trial source apparently can be much more inaccurate in percentage terms
than, for example, the estimation of emissions from a residential source.
Such behavior, however, is typical to some degree of any emission
factor. Also, it is our belief that this variation has been dampened by
basing the emission factors on building floor area instead of land area.
Finally, as noted in Chapter I, the estimation of total emissions in a
region will approach the true population value.
Our approach to the development of land use based emission factors
in the industrial sector differs from that used in the residential and com-
mercial-institutional sectors. Actual observations of fuel consumption (or
emissions) and building floor area are not readily available. Further-
more, given the assumed variation in the emissions per building floor area,
a relatively large sample would be needed for our accurate estimate of the
mean.
Consequently, our approach is based on separate observations of
building floor area per employee, fuel consumption per employee, and emis-
sions per fuel consumption, viz.,
where: Q. = emissions of pollutant i
A. = floor area, industrial category j
J
Fk = f uel , type k
E. = employment, industrial category j
J
3-49
-------
(Qi/Fk) is available from EPA publication AP-42 [7]. Observations of
(FL/E.) are available from the Census of Manufacturers £30], disagregated
K J
by state. (E-/A-) is available in reference 31.
J J
The quantity is summed over fuel type, k, and as such assumes
the relative fuel choices within an industrial category j (SIC code j).
Note that the results of this process is an emission factpr disaggregated
by SIC code; an aggregated industrial emission factor could be constructed
for a small area by compiling an average weighted by small area employment in
each SIC category.
It is important to note that process emissions are not considered in
this approach. Argonne £6] has demonstrated the inadequacy of industrial
land use based emission factors when applied to a point source inventory
dominated by process particulate matter emissions. As our approach only
considers fuel combustion emissions, it is more akin to the typical treatment
of area source emissions in an emissions survey [32]. It can reasonably be
extended to point^source emissions in areas where process emissions are not
significant.
The development of an average national industrial land use based
emission factor is demonstrated in Tables 3-23 through 3-27. These tables
implicitly assume the national fuel choice proportions for each two digit
SIC code. Therefore, these tables will be inaccurate in regions of the
Country that are more or less dependent on coal or natural gas than the
average of the nation. Accordingly, 1t is suggested that the state-level
fuel choice proportions [30] be used instead of the national values used in
Tables 3-24-
Table 3-23 presents the mean building floor area per employee in
each SIC category, as presented in reference 31.
Table 3-24 presents the mean consumption per employee of each fuel
type, developed from references 30 and 33.
Table 3-25, the product of Tables 3-23 and 3-24, presents the mean
consumption per floor area by fuel type in each SIC category.
3-50
-------
Table 3-26 restates the emission factors found in reference 7.
Table 2.-.13 presents the product of the emission factors in Table
3-26 and the mean consumption per floor area in Table 3-25.
3-51
-------
TABLE 3-23
ESTIMATED BUILDING FLOOR AREA PER EMPLOYEE
BY TWO DIGIT 1967 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE
SIC Code Name Square Feet
Per Employee
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Ordnance and Accessories
Food and Kindred Products
Tobacco Manufacturers
Textile Mill Products
Apparel
Lumber and wood products
Furniture and Fixtures
Paper and Allied Products
Printing, Publishing and Allied Industries
Chemicals and Allied Products
Petroleum Refining and Related Industries
Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastics
Leather and Leather Products
Stone Clay and Glass Products
Primary Metal Industries
Fabricated Metal Products
Machinery
Electrical Machinery
Transportation Equipment
Instruments
Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries
206
598
282
403
263
796
628
649
363
649
394
604
345
545
352
476
418
255
313
253
426
3-52
-------
en
co
TABLE 3-24
MEAN 1971 FUEL CONSUMPTION PER;EMPLOYEE
BY 1967 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39 and
Distillate Oil
barrels per employee
7.04
3.00
5.13
.72
10.38
1.33
15.97
.87
17.44
22.94
5.34
2.53
19.10
13.66
2.31
1.82
1.64
2.01
1.59
19 2.55
Residual Oil
barrels per employee
6.38
7.49
7.23
.16
1.64
.83
73.59
.40
22.45
75.75
4.37
2.12
14.44
17.93
1.48
1.59
1.52
2.16
3.05
2.24
Coal
tons per employee
2.88
2.58
1.70
.11 .
.35
.52
14.94
.02
.22
2.54
2.29
.42
16.66
8.09
.51
.70
.41
1.61
1.83
.20
Gas
Mcf per employee
.31
.06
.11
.01
.13
.04
.75
.04
1.68
9.35
.14
.03
1.21
.94
.12
.09
.06
.09
.04
.06
Electricity
10^ kWh per employee
22.91
13.55
27.52
4.18
17.57
9.05
55.39
9.15
117.37
167.66
30.17
6.24
42.65
104.68
15.87
12.80
14.21
16.95
9.50
10.65
-------
CO
I
TABLE 3-25
MEAN 1971 FUEL CONSUMPTION FOR HEAT AND POWER PER BUILDING FLOOR AREA,
BY TWO DIGIT 1967 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
19 & 30
Distillate Oil
(gals/sq.ft.)
0.49
.45
.53
.1
.55
.0.9
1.03
.10
1.13
2.45
.37
.31
1.47
1.63
.20
.18
,28
.27
.26
.32
Residual Oil
(gals/sq.ft.)
•45
1.12
.75
.03
.09
.06
4.76
.05
1.45
8.08
.30
.26
1.11
2.14
.13
.16
.25
,29
.51
.28
Coal
(Ibs/sq.ft.)
9.63
18.32
8.46
.85
.87
1.65
46.03
.09
.69
12.88
7.58
2.45
61.15
45.98
2.13
3.33
3.24
10.29
14.43
1.18
Gas
(cf/sq.ft.)
.52
.21
.27
.04
.17
•t>7
1.16
.10
2.59
23.74
.23
.09
2.22
2.68
.26
.21
.25
.28
..16
.18
Electricity
(kWh/sq.ft.)
38.32
48.03
68.28
15.89
22.08
14.41
85.34
25.20
180.84
425.53
49.95
18.09
78.27
297.40
33.34
30.63
55.71
54.16
37.56
31.23
-------
TABLE 3-26
INDUSTRIAL EMISSION FACTORS
Units PM SO, CO HC
Bituminous Coal
Natural Gas
Distillate Oil
Residual Oil
Ib/ton
lb/106 cf
lb/1000 gal.
lb/1000 gal.
13A
10
15
23
385
.6
1445
1575
2
17
4
4
1
3
3
3
15
180
60
60
3^55
-------
IV. GENERATION OF LAND USE BASED EMISSION FACTORS
As discussed in Chapter I, the land use based emission factor is a pro-
duct of the "standard" emission factor and the activity factor, i.e., energy
consumption per unit floor area.
The "standard" emission factors used in this study were those compiled
in reference 7 and restated in Table 4-1 in terms of British thermal units
of fuel input. Heat contents of selected fuels are shown in Table 4-2.
One-hundred and fifty thousand (150,000) British thermal units per gallon
were used for residual oil. Residential use of fuel oil was assumed to be
supplied by distillate oils; commercial-institutional use of fuel oil was
assumed to be supplied by residual oils.
The product of the activity factors developed in Chapter III and the
emission factors presented in Table 4-1 is the land use based emission fac-
tors. These factors have been computed and are summarized in Chapter II.
The secondary emissions, i.e.,, the emissions at the local power plant,
depends both on the electricity demand in the region under consideration and
the nature of the local power plant supplying this demand. It is advisable
to contact the local utility to determine the emissions per kWh generated.
As a default value, typical plant efficiencies* and transmission losses**
have been employed to generate Table 4-3, typical emissions at electric utili-
ties in terms .of kilowatt-hours consumed by ultimate customers.
It is useful to note at this point what has not been included in the
emission factors summarized in Chapter II. Table 4-4 presents the percentage
of the national emission loading by source category. As mentioned in Chapter
III, Section C, process emissions were not included in the industrial land
use emission factors. This would have the effect of understating particulate
* 10,250 Btu per kWh generated for coal plants,
10,800 Btu per kWh generated for oil and gas plants [34]
**10% of kWh consumed are transmission losses [35]
4-1
-------
TABLE 4-1
SELECTED EMISSION FACTORS, LBS PER BTU
Residential
oil
gas
Commercial-
Institutional
oil
gas
7
1
1
1
PM
.14 x
.00 x
.53 x
.00 x
S0x
io-8
io-8
io-7
io-8
1.03 x
6.00 x
1.06 x
6.00 x
10"6S
io-10
10"6S
io-10
CO
3.57
2.00
2.67
2.00
x 10"8
x IO"8
x 10"8
x 10"8
HC
2.14 x
8.00 x
3.00 x
8.00 x
NOX
io-8
io-9
io-6
TO'9
8.57
1.00
4.00
1.00
x 10"8
x 10"7
x 10'7
x 10'7
TABLE 4-2
ENERGY CONTENTS OF SELECTED FUELS
Fuel
Heating Value
Coal
anthracite
bituminous
sub-bituminous
lignite
Heavy Fuel 011s and Middle Distillates
kerosene
No. 2 burner fuel oil
No.' 4 heavy fuel- oil
No. 5 heavy fuel oil
No. 6 heavy fuel oil, 2.7% sulfur
No. 6 heavy fuel oil, 0.3% sulfur
Gas
natural
liquefied butane
liquefied propane
13,900 Btu/lb.
14,000 Btu/lb.
12,600 Btu/lb.
11,000 Btu/lb.
134,000
140,000
144,000
150,000
152,000
143,800
Btu/gallon
Btu/gallon
Btu/gallon
Btu/gallon
Btu/gallon
Btu/gallon
1,000 Btu/cu.ft.
103,300 Btu/gallon
91,600 Btu/gallon
4-2
-------
TABLE 4-3
TYPICAL EMISSION FACTORS FOR ELECTRIC UTILITIES
Ibs. emissions per kWh sold to customer
PM S0¥ CO HC N0y
A A
coal 5.23 x 10"3 1.53 x 10'2s 4.03 x lO"4 1.21 x 10'4 2.21 x 10'2
oil 6.34 x 10"3 1.26xlO-2S 2.38 x 10"4 1.58xlQ-4 8.32 x 10"3
gas 1.19xlO'4 7.13 x 10"6 2.02 x 10"4 1.19 x 10"5 8.32 x 10'3
TABLE 4-4
PERCENTAGE OF NATIONAL EMISSIONS LOADINGS BY SOURCE CATEGORY
Fuel Combustion
Industrial Process
Solid Waste Disposal
Land Vehicles
Other
PM
52%
45%
H
1%
1%
S0x
85%
14%
0%
1%
0%
NOX
59%
3%
2%
35%
1%
HC
1%
53%
5%
34%
8%
CO
1%
32%
5%
60%
2%
Source: Reference 36
4-3
-------
and hydrocarbon emissions in regions characterized predominantly by indus-
trial process emissions*.
In ..addition, .note that solid waste disposal and solvent evaporation
have been ignored 1n developing the land use based emission factors in this
report. Considering the accuracy of these factors and Table 4-4, the impact
of this omission would appear to be negligible.
*Table 4-4 probably overstates the impact of ignoring process emissions on
particulate matter emissions, since fugitive dust sources are largely unac-
counted for in reference 36.
4-4
-------
V. REFERENCES
1. 40 Federal Register 49048
40 Federal Register 41941
40 Federal Register 25814
40 Federal Register 23746
40 Federal RegTslir" 18726
40 Federal Register 16343
40 Federal Register 9599
40 Federal Register 6279
(October 20, 1975),
(September 9, 1975),
(June 19, 1975),
(June 2, 1975),
(April 29, 1975),
(May 8, 1974),
(April 18, 1973), and
(March 8, 1973).
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Review of Federal Actions
Impacting the Environment. Washington, D.C.:EPA, 1975
(Manual TN2/3-1-75).
Office of Federal Activities, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Guidelines for Review of Environmental Impact Statements; Volume I:
Highway Projects.Washington, D.C.:EPA, 1973.(Volume II on
Airports and Volume III on Steam Channelization will be published
shortly.)
39 Federal Register 16186 (May 7, 1974).
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Guidelines for Preparing Environmental Impact
Statements. Research Triangle Park, NC:OAQPS, May, 1975.
3. 40 Federal Register 28064 (July 3, 1975),
39 Federal Register 45014 (December 30, 1974),
39 Federal Register 25292 (July 9, 1974),
39 Federal Register 7270 (February 25, 1974), and
38 Federal Register 15834 (June 18, 1973).
4. 40 Federal Register 25504 (June 12, 1975),
39 Federal Register 42510 (December 5, 1974),
39 Federal Register 31000 (August 27, 1974),
38 Federal Register 18986 (July 16, 1973), and
37 Federal Register 23836 (November 9, 1972).
5. Goodrich, John C., Hackensack Meadow!ands Air Pollution Study-Emission
Projection Methodology. Prepared for the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by
Environmental Research and Technology, October 1973. (EPA-450/3-74-
056-b).
6. Kennedy,.A.S. et al., Air Pollution Land Use Planning Project Volume II:
. Methods for Predicting Air Pollution Concentrations from Land Use.
Prepared for the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency by the Center for Environmental
Studies, Argonne National Laboratory, May 1973. (EPA-450/3-74-0280b).
5-1
-------
7. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors,
2nd Edition, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1973. and supplements.
(AP-42).
8. See, for example, the Keystone Coal Industry Manual. Published by the
Mining Information Services of McGraw Hill/New York, NY, 1969.
9. Couillard, James, Browns Directory of North American Gas Companies.
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Duluth, Minnesota, 1973.
10. Environmental Data Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Heating and Cooling Degree Day Data, Environmental
Information Summaries C-14.Ashevflle, North Carolina, September,
1974.
11. Mayer, L., and Robinson, J., A Statistical Analysis of the Monthly
Consumption of Gas and Electricity in the Home/Center for Environ-
mental Studies Report No. 18, Princeton University, Princeton,
NJ, April 1975.
12. Federal Energy Administration, Project Independence Blueprint:
Volume I. Prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc., for the Interagency
Task Force on Energy Conservation under the Direction of the Council
on Environmental Quality, November 1974.
13. Residential Appliance Gas Consumption. Phase 4: Lincoln, Nebraska.
Prepared by the Marketing Division Northern Natural Gas Company, Omaha,
Nebraska, July 1973.
14. Anderson, R., Residential Energy Consumption: Single Family Housing
Final Report. Prepared by Hittman Associates for the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC, March, 1973.
15. American Gas Association, Gas House. Heating Survey. Arlington,
Virginia (Annual).
16. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning
and Analysis. Volume 13: Allocating Projected Emissions to Sub-
County Areas. Research Triangle Park, NC, November 1974.
(EPA-450/4-74-014).
17. Pilati, D., Room Air Conditioner Lifetime Cost Considerations: Annual
Operating Hours and Efficiencies. Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 1975 (ORNL-NSF-EP-85).
18. American Gas Association, Info-Data Sheet: • Use of Gas by Residential
Appliances, Arlington, Virginia, 1971.
5-2
-------
IQ Science and Public Policy Program, University of Oklahoma at Norman,
AS!E2La r."°r.v Alternatives. A Comparative Analysis. Prepared
for the Council of Environmental Quality, Energy Research and Develop-
ment Admin tstrati on, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Energy
Administration Federal Power Commission; Bureau of Land Management,
5nd NatiSSa Science Foundation. U.S. Government Printing Office,
SshlngtoS! DC! May 1975. (GPO No. 041-001-00025-4).
20 pp-fHm"'1 ^^Y Consumption-MuItifamily Housing. Prepared by
Z°- Kttniin Associates for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Washington, DC, June 1974.
21 Electric Heating Association, Inc., EHA Case History. New York, NY.
AboSt 300 case histories published between 1965 and 1970.
99 Gnrdian Associates, Environmental Impact of Electric vs. Fossil Fuel
22' J£™aH^«°"fa't the Welfare Island Development Project. Prepared
for the New York State Urban Development Corporation. New York, NY,
November, 1972.
i H and Kirkwama, J., "The Fossil Electric Ratio",
/Society of Mechanical Engineers, Paper No. 68-WA/PEM-3,
December, 1968.
9& l\ ,1 Millf-r "* *i-- Use of Steam-Electric Power Plants to Provide
ThJJ.1 Fnprgy to Urban Areas. Prepared by Uak Ridge National
Laboratory under interagency agreement with the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, January 1971.
?R Hittman Associates, Residential Energy Consumption Multifamily Housing
DataTouisition. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Housing and
TJfbTn Development. Washington. DC, November 1973.
26 R DimHj p F - Actual Operating Results-All Electric Schools.
Massachusetts, JuneH9, 1967.
27 R. Dillard, P.E., Comparison of Actual Energy Costs in School
Buildings,, Massachusetts, June 19, 1967.
™ R Hale and L Pflug, The Truth on the Back of an Envelope. Prepared
by the Empire'oistrictTlectric Company, Joplin, Missouri, October
1966,
29 fl^HRAF'Heating. Ventilating. Air Conditioning Guide. American Society
' Of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc.,
1958, pages 471-479.
|5-3
-------
30. U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1972 Census of Manufactures; Fuels and
Electric Energy Consumed. U.S. Government Printing Office,~
Washington, DC, 1973.
31. Ide, E., Estimating Land and Floor Area Implicit in Employment
Projections, Volumes I and II.Prepared for Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, DC, 1972.
32. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Guide for Compiling a Comprehensive Emission
Inventory. Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1973.
33. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Annual Survey of Manufacturers: 1971,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1973.
34. National Coal Association, Steam Electric Plant Factors, Washington,
DC, 1973.
35. Edison Electric Institute, Statistical Yearbook of the Electric Utility
Industry. New York, NY, 1972.
36. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972 National Emissions Report, Research Triangle
Park, NC, June, 1974.
37. American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning
Engineers, Handbook of Fundamentals. New York, 1972.
38. Building Owners and Managers Association International, 1975 Office
Building Experience Exchange Report for the Calendar Year 1974.
Chicago, Illinois, 1975.
39. U.S. Office of Management and Badge, Standard Industrial Classification
Manual. 1972. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC.
5-4
-------
APPENDIX A
CALCULATION OF RESIDENTIAL AIR
CONDITIONER OPERATING HOURS
Abstracted From Reference 17
A-l
-------
Compressor-operating hours were calculated by using the National Bureau
of Standard Load Determination Computer Programmer. Calcualations were per-
formed using hour-by-hour weather tapes for one year in 10 Cities. To gen-
eralize these results to other locations, the results are assumed a function
of latitude and weather variables. This allowed the generation of the con-
tour map given in Figure 1-3. The rest of this appendix outlines the metho-
dology used by Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
To estimate the compressor operating hours for locations not calcu-
lated by NBSLD, a series of multivariable regression relationships was used.
Annual cooling degree hours (70°F base) are obtained as a function of lati-
tude and dry-bulb temperatures that are exceeded 1 and 5% of the time during
the months of June through September for the 10 cities. Air conditioner capa-
city requirements are found as a function of latitude, dry-and wet-bulb
temperatures that are exceeded 1% of the time during the summer months, and
the difference between the average maximum and average minimum temperatures
during the warmest month.
Annual cooling requirements are assumed a function of the predicted
cooling degree hours (sensible load), the latitude (solar load), and the
square of the difference between the 5% exceeded wet bulb temperature and
65°F (latent infiltration load; if negative, zero is assumed). For the assumed
indoor conditions (78°F, 50% relative humidity), no latent infiltration load
occurs if the outdoor wet-bulb temperature is below 65°F. For cooling require-
ments when natural ventilation is also used, an additional wind variable is
included. The coincident wind variable for Ref. 37 is used as a proxy for
the wind intensity.
Average values of the independent variables required to predict cooling
degree hours, cooling capacity and annual cooling requirements are given in
Ref. 37 for over 700 cities. The data for each city are used to calculate
the compressor-operating hours (cooling requirement divided by capacity) and
plot the contour maps in Figure 1-3, Table A-l compares the predictions with
the NBSLD calculations for the cities and years investigated.
A-2
-------
TABLE A-l
COMPARISON OF NBSLD CALCULATIONS AND PREDICTION
EQUATIONS FOR ANNUAL COMPRESSOR-OPERATING HOURS
Predictions
Atlanta (1955
Chicago (1955)
Dallas (1955)
Miami (1955)
Minneapolis (1949)
New Orleans (1955)
New YorKb(1955)
Phoenix (1955)
San Diego (1955)
Topeka (1959)
1521
727
2003
2901
590
2305
755
2122
592
932
1577
868
1979
2971
462
2157
765
2102
583
1023
(3.7)
(19.5)
(1.2)
(2.4)
(21.6)
(6.4)
(1.3)
(.9)
(1.4)
(9.7)
leather tape is for Kennedy Airport.
A-3
-------
APPENDIX B
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF BUILDING OWNER'S
AND MANAGERS ASSOCIATION (BOMA) SAMPLE
B-l
-------
The Building Owners and Managers Association International of Chicago,
Illinois publishes annually an Office Building Experience Exchange Report
which summarizes office building operating expenses and income as reported by
their members [35]. With their assistance, Walden Research was able to con-
struct a sample of office energy consumption variables as summarized in Table
B-l. The data were such that buildings were not identified; thus, the opera- ;
tions of individual buildings were not disclosed. All data were annual.
The basic specification of the analysis was;
Energy Consumption per square foot = « + (g^ht.d.d.) + (p *cl.d.d.)
The energy consumption of a building can be categorized into three compo-
nents: process, space heating, and space cooling. Theoretically, the process
consumption should be a constant, while space heating and space cooling are
functions of climate, here specified as heating and cooling degree days. The
principal reason for this specification, and not separate analyses of the three
components was that the BOMA data did not distinguish between the three com-
ponents.
Before this regression could be performed, the various efficiencies of
utilization had to be accounted for. As a first approximation, we assumed 1.0
for electricity, 0.7 for gas, 0.6 for oil, 0.8 for steam, and 0.5 for other
fuels. Thus, the total energy demand per square foot of each office building was
computed as follows:
ENERGY F FUEL 1 + .7 * FUEL 2 + .6 * FUEL 3 + .8 * FUEL 4 + .5 * FUEL 5
Regression analysis then yielded, with standard errors in parenthesis;
ENERGY = 95467 + 6.619 ht.d.d. + 5.150 cl.d.d.
(3.874) (8.848)
F=2.92 F=.339
R2 = .011 St. Error = 101466 F (2,273) = 1.53
The result of this regression was very disappointing; only one percent of the
variance in office building energy consumption per square foot could be ex-
plained by heating and cooling degree days.
B-2
-------
TABLE B-l
VARIABLE NAMES IN BOMA SAMPLE
AGE Age of Building
HEIGHT Height of Building, number of stories
OCCUR Occupancy Rate, percentage
-AREA Building Floor Area, square feet
FUEL! Electricity Consumption per square foot, Btu/sq.ft.
FUEL2 Gas Consumption per square foot, Btu/sq.ft.
FUELS Oil Consumption per square foot, Btu/sq.ft.
FUEL4 Steam Consumption per square foot, Btu/sq.ft.
FUEL5 Other Fuels (principally coal and chilled water) Btu/sq.ft.
FUELSUM Total Energy Consumption per square foot, Btu/sq.ft.
HTDEGDAY Heating Degree Days,
CLDEGDAY Cooling Degree Days
HRSOV80 Hours Temperature was over 80°
COOLHRS Compressor Operating Hours (from reference 17)
B-3
-------
The use of operating hours instead of cooling degree days was not much
different.
ENERGY = 89823 + (7.371*ht.d.d.) + (11.29*cl.d.d.)
(3.895) .(12.14)
F=3.58 F=.866
R2 = .013 Std. Error = 101,367 F = (2,273) =1.79
To investigate the possible influence of incorrect utilization effici-
encies or size of building, seven zero-one dummy variables were constructed,
viz.,
DUM 50 T if AREA is less than 50,000
DUM 100 T if AREA is greater than 100,000
DUM EL EC 'T if FUEL is non zero
DUM GAS 'I1 if FUEL is non zero
DUM OIL '!' if FUEL is non-zero
DUM STEAM T if FUEL is non zero
DUM OTHER V if FUEL is non zero
In stepwise regression analysis, if either of the first two variables were
significant, one would suspect important differences in energy consumption
per square foot in buildings in different size classes. If any of the last
five dummies were important, one would suspect that the utilization effi-
ciency for that fuel was either too large or too small.
Stepwise regression analysis on these dummies and all the other avail-
able variables is shown in Table B-2. A 95% confidence level was used (i.e.,
t = 1.96, F = 3.84). Interestingly, the age of a building was the most im-
portant variable, with energy consumption increasing in more recently con-
structed buildings. DUM ELEC was positive and significant, indicating that
the utilization efficiency of electricity was higher than 1.0 (perhaps due
to the use of heat pumps) or that the other utilization efficiencies were too
high. However, the important point of this regression is that none of the
variables considered are able to explain very much of the variance in energy
p
Consumption per square foot. The R is only .06.
B-4
-------
TABLE B-2
STEPWISE ANALYSIS OF BOMA SAMPLE
DEPENDENT VARIABLE..
ENERGY
MULTIPLE R .25185
R SQyARE .06343
ADJUSTED R SQUARE o05657
STANDARD ERROR 98924.66013
OF
3
272
F
6.14023
VARIABLE
AGE
HTDEGDAY
DUMELEC
(CONSTAMI
VARIABLES IN THE EQUATION -—-
B BETA STD ERROR B
-818.01489
8.74996
79767.30718
38062.25934
-.19771
.15975
.13188
250.66081
3.33169
35613.17036
10.633
6.897
5.017
VARIABLES NOT IN THE EQUATION
VARIABLE
HEIGHT
NOBLD6
OCCUR
AREA
CLOE6DAY
HRSOV80
COOLHRS
OUM50
OUM100
DUM6AS
OUMOIL
DUMSTEAM
DUMOTHER
BETA IN
-.04594
.01618
.10504
-.10865
.03776
.07118
.04269
-.03602
.09432
.05792
.05275
.06799
-.10627
PARTIAL TOLERANCE
-.04715
.01667
.10400
-.10860
.03306
.06437
.03686
-.03711
.09658
.05971
.05354
.06557
-.10968
.96655
.99457
.91820
.93571
.71776
.76579
.69902
.99404
.98211
.99538
.96465
.87106
.99778
.604
.075
2.963
3.234
.296
1.127
.369
.374
2.552
.970
•779
1.176
3.300
B-5
-------
Due to the significance of DUM ELEC, subsequent regressions were per-
formed with different utilization efficiencies. No significant change in the
o
coefficients or R was noted.
The sample was then divided into three sub-samples, buildings less than
50,000, between 50,000 and 100,000, and over 100,000 square feet. The compari-
son of individual regressions on these samples indicated no significant differ-
ence 1n the resulting coefficients. In addition, analysis of variance of the
mean energy consumption per square foot also showed no difference between the
means of each sample.
Finally, it should be noted that the goal of this analysis was to be able to
predict total energy consumption of office buildings, not energy consumption
per square foot. It is important then to ask how well energy consumption; is
predicted by using energy consumption per square foot. An approximate answer
to this question is afforded by the regression of energy consumption on area,
viz.,
Energy in Btu = .99 x 1010 + 88152 Area
R2 = .51
(other statistics were not readily available)
One is able to account for slightly over 50% of the variation in total energy
consumption per building by area alone.
B-6
-------
APPENDIX C
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF ELECTRIC HEATING
ASSOCIATION (EHA) SAMPLE
C-l
-------
The Electric Heating Association published a series of case studies
of recent all-electric buildings. These case studies reported actual monthly
electricity consumption of the building. An example of the EHA case studies
is shown in Figure 1.
The monthly electricity consumption data was coded for each building,
along with building area, volume, and other design information on the EHA
case study. Heating and cooling degree days, hours over 80°, and operating
hours were compiled and also coded.
Regression analysis was performed separately for each building category on
both monthly and annual data. The results are summarized on Table 4. One
immediately notes the substantial differences between the monthly and annual
regressions. We believe there are two complimentary reasons for this phenomena.
First, the annual data, by summing the monthly data, has lost some of the vari-: ;
ance. Secondly, the monthly data is a hybrid time series-cross sectional
2
sample. One traditionally expects a higher R in time series analysis. The mon-
thly data is considered to be more relevant to the goal of this analysis, as it
can more adequately differentiate between process, heating, and cooling energy
demand.
The commercial, hospital, school, and hotel data in the EHA sample were
separately desegregated into building size classes. Separate regressions
were then performed on each sub-sample and the results compared (e.g., the coe-
fficients in the regression of commercial electricity consumption per square foot
on heating and cooling degree days were compared between separate regressions on
buildings less than 50,000 square feet, 50,000-100,000 square feet, and greater
than 100,000 square feet). The regressions were not significantly different
between the different size classes, i.e., there was not a significant difference
in the energy consumption per square foot in buildings of various sizes. It is
our opinion that in fact there are significant differences in the population, but
these differences are small when compared to the confidence interval of each
regression.
C-2
-------
Eleven-story Wachovia Building in Raleigh, N.C.
JHE CASE-The Wachovia Building in Raleigh,
North Carolina, an 11-story bank and office build-
ing designed by A. G. Odell, Jr., and Associates,
architects and engineers of Charlotte, N.C., accom-
plishes two objectives of good design: it meets the
general office needs of the Wachovia Bank and
Trust Company and it adds a new and interesting
dimension to the city's changing skyline.
.Now in its 90th year with 89 offices in 42 com-
munities and resources in excess of $1.4 billion,
Wachovia is the largest'commercial bank in the
Southeast and the 39th largest in the United States
(out of some 13,000). In keeping with this impres-
sive record of growth and service, the bank's direc-
tors wanted the Raleigh building to be "architec-
turally interesting, functionally efficient, and
capable of future expansion."
THE H/STORY-The resulting building meets
these objectives admirably. A pattern of vertical
panels of cast stone and marble alternate with
dark-tinted glass on the upper seven floors to em-
phasize the classic simplicity of the structure and
the glass encased public banking area and over-
looks the two-story entrance lobbies at either end
of the building. Interior spaces include a huge com-
puter center on the fifth floor which operates under
carefully controlled temperature and humidity con-
ditions made possible by the building's electric
heating/cooling system.
An electric space conditioning system was se-
lected after a feasibility study revealed that it would
save between $3,500 and $5,000 a-year on owning
and operating costs and permit each zone to be
controlled independently. Air is distributed through
a medium-pressure dual-duct system with individ-
ual constant-volume mixing boxes for each office
and space. The system, which permits simultane-
ous heating or cooling, utilizes a centrifugal chiller
with double-bundle condenser to supply hot and
cold water to coils in three air handling units.
Since completion of the building in January,
1965, the electric system has performed beauti-
fully, consulting engineer Edgar C. Jones of the
Odell firm reports, operating well within the esti-
mated costs and at the same time meeting all of
the requirements of temperature and humidity con-
FIGURE 1 EHA CASE STUDIES
C-3
-------
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
CATEGORY OF STRUCTURE:
Commercial—Office Building
GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
Area: 122,800 sq ft
Volume: 1,800,000 cu ft ^
Number of floors: 11
Number of occupants: 850
Types of rooms: banking lobby, private and gen-
eral offices, computer room, cafeteria, kitchen,
rental suites
CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
Glass: double, solar bronze
Exterior walls: pre-cast concrete panels. 3" glass
fiber batts (R:ll), plaster board;
U-factor: 0.08
Roof and ceilings: mechanical room on roof is un-
heated but machines generate enough heat
gain to minimize heat loss through the roof.
U-factcr does not apply.
Floors: concrete slab
Gross exposed wall area: 55,158 sq ft
Glass area: 26.592 sq ft
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN CONDITIONS:
Heating:
Heat loss Btuh: 2.200,000
Normal degree days: 3393
Ventilation requirements: 22,700 cfm
Design conditions: 10F outdoors; 75F indoors
Cooling:
Heat gain Btuh: 6.000.000
Ventilation requirements: 22,700 cfm
Design conditions: 95F dbt, 78F wbt outdoors;
75F, 50% rh indoors
LIGHTING:
Levels in footcandles: 35-100
Levels in watts/sq ft: 3-5
Type: fluorescent and incandescent
HEATING AND COOLING SYSTEM:
Air is distributed through a medium-pressure
dual-duct system with individual constant-volume
mixing boxes fcr each office and space. The heart
of the system, which is capable of simultaneously
heating and cooiing, is a 195-kw centrifugal cnil-
ler with double-bundle condenser that supplies
both warm erd cr.'d water to cc''s 'r ;-.-~5 e'r
hand Tg units. \'>''.'" t^is a'ra-ge~ = -.t -.eat can
be trar.5;erreci frc.Ti areas requiring ccoling for
use in ether zones. K'"e 50-k.v 'rr~iers:on heat-
ers in tr,e cn'l.ed v,~:er return line provide auxil-
iary neat and five 50-kw elements in the warm
water loop are used for emergency. A second
chiller, rated at 265-kw. is used for cooling loads
only.
ELECTRICAL SERVICE:
Type: underground
Voltage: 277/480v, 3 phase, 4 wire, wye
Metering: secondary
CONNECTED LOADS:
Heating & Cooling (500 tons)
Lighting
Cooking
Water Heating
SPCW Melting
Other
TOTAL
645 kw
370 kw
100 kw
36 kw
210kw
150kw
1511 kw
FIGURE 1
9
10
11
12
13
15
INSTALLED COST:*
General Work
Electrical
Mechanical
Plumbing
TOTALS
$2,657,839
248,400
413,433
92,400
$22.06/sqft
2.06/sqft
3.43/sqft
.77/sqft
$3,412,072 $28.32/sqft
'Building was completed 1/65
HOURS AND METHODS OF OPERATION:
9 a.m. to 5 p.m. five days a week.
OPERATING COST:
Period: 121 IS/67 to 12/19/68
Actual degree days: 3594
Actual kwh: 4.837,500*
Actual cost: 546,382.80*
Avg. cost per kwh: 0.96 cents*
*For total electrical usage
Degree
Billing Date
I/ 23 '68
2/21/68
3/22/68
4/23/68
5/22/68
6/21/68
7/23/68
8/22/68
9/23 '68
10/21 '68
11/20/68
12/19/68
TOTALS
Days
920
735
552
232
113
31
36
339
655
3594
lemanrf
1188
1134
1053
810
1053
891
945
864
891
972
1053
1161
kwh
513,000
430,500
412,500
388,500
370,500
357,000
393,000
426.000
409,500
346.500
391.500
399.CCO
Amount
$ 4,728.20
4,220.60
3,999.20
3,515.00
3,747.00
3,439.40
3.731. CO
3.815.60
3.754.40
3.^89.80
3.373.20
•i.C59.43
4,837,500 $45.382.83
FEATURES:
Temperatures in all zones can be controlled in-
dependently. A temperature sensor in each space
is wired into a central control panel located in the
basement. Comfort conditions are adjusted at
the panel, not within the zones themselves. •
REASON'S FOR INSTALLING ELECTRIC HEAT:
A feasibility study indicated that the annual own-
ing and operat'ng costs for the ail-electric system
would be from S3,500 to 55,000 less tr-.g'n the
costs of ec'ji^a'ent systerrs us'ng gas srd t.'.c
grades of fuel cii for heating. Because aesthetics
was also an ip-rjcrtant des'gn considerate."., the
choice was 'u-t-e- Vi'je.-ced b> trie fa:t :-=t t-s
electric s,s:err .-.cj.a ret require chimneys or
flues.
PERSONNEL:
Owner: Wachovia Bank and Trust Co.
Architects and Engineers: A. G. Odell, Jr., and
Associates
General Contractor: T. A. Loving Company
Electrical Contractor: A & N Electric Co.
Mechanical Contractor: Albernarle Plumbing &
Heating Co.
Utility Carolina Power & Light Company
PREPARED BY:
R. W. McDonald. System Heating & Cooling En-
gineer, Carolina Power & Light Company.
VERIFIED BY:
A. G. Odell, Jr., FAIA
Edgar Clones, P.E.
EHA CASE STUDIES (CON'T)
C-4
-------
TABLE 4
o
CATEGORY
OFFICES
COMMERCIAL
HOSPITALS
CULTURAL
SCHOOLS
HOTELS
CHURCHES
LOW R-ISE
HIGH RISE
REGRESSIONS OF KWH PER SQUARE FOOT ON
HEATING (Bu) AND COOLING (Br) DEGREE DAYS - EHA DATA
n L
Monthly Data
6L
.09
.04
.11
.43
.63
.37
.14
.32
.51
1.86
1.90
2.21
.938
.594
1.03
.346
476.8
493.92
.00115
.00140
.00244
.00185
.00165
.00185
.00293
1.292
1.428
.00086
.0026
.00246
.00059
.00047
.00238
.00376
1.108
3.017
456
583
108
119
581
190
179
168
96
Annual Data
BL
.02
! .06
.08
.02
.02
.13
.19
.18
.72
3.75
32.04
-10.98
27.11
14.697
-5.77
-28.44
-617.8
-1024.5
.00332
.00417
.00815
-.00196
.00027
.00437
.00740
2.26158
7.74855
.00654
-.00123
.0102.0
-.00071
-.00019
.00744
.01552
2.83682
2.19859
38
49
9
10
49
16
16
14
8
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
2.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Growth Effects of Major Land Use Projects,
Vol. II: Compilation of Land Use Based Emission Factoi
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
5. REPORT DATE
June, 1976
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
S
7. AUTHOR(S)
Frank H.
Benesh
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
C-781 - b
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Walden Research Division of Abcor
201 Vassar Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2076
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Strategies and Air Standards Division (MD-12)
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Growth Effects of Major Land Use Projects is a research program whose goal is to
formulate a methodology to predict air pollutant emissions resulting from the
construction and operation of two types of major land use projects, large residential
projects and large concentrations of employment (i.e., office parks and industrial
parks) Emissions are quantified from the major project, from land use induced
'Tiy the major project, from secondary activity occurring off-site (ie., generation
of electricity by utilities), and from motor vehicle traffic associated with both
the major project and its induced land uses.
This report documents the development of a set of land use based emission factors
(i.e., emissions per unit of building floor area or per dwelling unit) that are
used to estimate emissions from the induced land uses and secondary activities.
To accomplish this energy consumption in several categories of buildings is
quantified.
Previous and subsequent reports (i.e., Volume I and Volume III) document the
development of a model to predict the induced land use, a methodology for
predicting vehicular traffic, and the estimation of emissions from vehicular traffic.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Land Use
Planning
Industrial Areas
Residential Areas
Emission Factors
Land Use Emissions
Energy Consumption in
Buildings
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
122
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
------- |