Dr. Lay holds a Bachelor's and Master's Degree in Economics from the University of Missouri, and a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Houston. He has been employed as a Staff Economist by EXXON Company; has served as an officer in the U. S. Navy, assigned to the Assistant Secretary for Financial Management; and, served on the staff of the Federal Power Commission. Since 1970, Dr. Lay has also been an Associate Professor and Lecturer in Economics at the George Washington University in Washington, D. C. To bring us up-to-date on Federal programs regarding the conservation and efficient use of energy, I am pleased to introduce to you Dr. Kenneth Lay. Dr. Kenneth Lay Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to Washington. We all seem to have this problem with hearings this morning. My hearings are not the same as your previous speaker, but I do have to leave in about fifteen minutes to testify on deep water ports. I don't have a formal statement. I do have a few comments I would like to make this morning to try to bring you up-to-date on some of the things that are happening in the energy conservation area. Some of these you are familiar with, some you may not be. I think most of you know the President did deliver a message to Congress on April 18 of this year concerning energy and one of the main thrusts in that message was directed toward developing an energy conservation program in the Federal government. There were several aspects to his announcement from the standpoint of our Department. One of the more important ones was the establishment of an energy conservation office in the Department of the Interior, charged with the responsibility for pulling together and coordinating all of the energy conservation efforts of the Federal government, undertaking research and analysis of new areas of energy conservation which promise to reduce energy consumption in the future, and educating the public, to some extent through the help of the State governments, on the various things they can do to reduce energy consumption. We think the potential in this area is extremely great. In preparation for putting the energy message together last fall, the Office for Emergency Preparedness undertook a fairly comprehensive study to determine the potential of energy conservation. That study came up with estimates that by 1980, with an extremely conscientious effort, we could save as much as seven million barrels of oil per day, or about a third of our estimated consumption by that year. That estimate may be overly ambitious, but even if we should achieve half that much or even a fourth of that much, it would make a tremendous difference as far as imports into the United States, the outflow of dollars resulting from the imports, and reducing shortages. As of this time we have established the new Office of Energy Conservation. We have not yet announced our Director for that Office. We do have staff people assigned who have been working with many of the Federal departments and agencies trying to pull together a short-term energy conservation program, one which will probably be announced in the very next few days. This program will be devoted primarily at reducing energy demands this summer and next fall, directed at mitigating the seriousness of the gasoline shortage, and then the heating oil shortage in the winter. This program will include many initiatives within the Federal Government, things that we hope to do in order to save energy, looking at such things as the operations of our buildings, the types of cars we buy and operate, and programs for encouraging car pooling. We will also be looking at such things as air conditioning, heating, and Government travel. Some of them are intermediate or long-term. We also will be looking at the activities of private individuals, the private industry, at what they must do. As has been widely publicized, we have analyzed speed limit possibilities as a means of reducing gasoline consumption. In that area, if speed limits are to be adjusted, the primary action must be taken by the State governments, so we are very anxious to establish a good working relationship with the representatives of the State governments in order that we can work toward a common objective of reducing energy consumption. If you look at our total energy problem between now and 1985, you can see the importance of energy conservation. Last year we imported about four and a half million barrels of oil per day, which is about 29 percent of our total oil requirement. This year it will jump to six million barrels of oil per day, which will be about 33 percent of our requirements. Even at those levels we are talking about dollar outflows on the energy account of between four and six billion dollars per year. Looking out to the year 1985, we are talking in terms of imports somewhere between 13 and 15 million barrels per day. In other words, between a two- and threefold increase in the current level and we are looking at dollar outflows variously estimated between 25 billion dollars and 70 billion dollars per year. Obviously, those are extremely significant numbers when you look at our total trade account. Last year our imports and exports were in the neighborhood of about 45 billion dollars, so we are looking at imports of energy which could be as great as our total imports last year. We must do things to reduce those imports and the associated dollar outflows. In addition to the balance of payments considerations, there is the question of whether the supplies will be available, whether in fact we can have the imports we are going to need to avoid domestic shortages. In both the short-term and the longer term, one of the most promising policy options is energy conservation. It takes many years to turn around such things as domestic drilling, to get Alaskan pipelines built, to get nuclear plants built, and to get new refineries built. So, even with a very devoted effort in many of these areas, we have little control over those imports. Energy consumption is something we can start trimming back immediately and thus reduce our imports and the possibility of shortages. I would like to commend your efforts here today and those of the Department of Commerce and Bureau of Standards. I think the effort you are undertaking in reviewing building codes and various State policies and Federal policies in these areas, and the research that has been done, is very good. Obviously here, as I mentioned earlier on the speed limit consideration, the States and the local governments have a most instrumental role to play. At the Federal level, the Bureau of Standards has done some excellent research on potential savings, the General Services Administration has done some excellent research and we have every reason to believe that we could realize between 20 and 40 percent energy savings on new buildings with the appropriate construction techniques, the appropriate insulation, the appropriate lighting, window spacing, etc. These are very substantial savings and in many cases the net cost of the buildings is not greater and in some cases less. We in our energy I hope that your Conference here today will be a productive one. conservation effort stand ready to help you as best we can. I think some of you are aware that at the Governor's Conference in Lake Tahoe week before last, one of the primary issues on the Governors' agenda was energy conservation and the energy problem. Out of that conference it was decided that the Governors would establish a working group which will represent the Governors at the Federal level in becoming more deeply involved in all energy policy matters. The intention to do that was endorsed by the Director of the Domestic Council, at his appearance at that conference and as soon as we have been notified of the members of that committee, and as soon as they are ready to sit down with us, we are anxious to do so. One of the primary items on the agenda will be energy conservation, so I am sure that you in your role here today can help your own Governors in preparing their positions on these important matters. Again, I hope that you have a very good conference today. The effort that you are undertaking is a most important one at the Federal level and we hope at the State and local level. Thank you. Kenneth C. Henke, Jr. It is my pleasure to introduce at this time Mr. Bernard E. Cabelus, National Chairman, National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards. Bernard E. Cabelus I am very I am very happy to see we have some sort of a turnout this morning. delighted to see that our "S" and "E" Committee has done such a good job. They have worked with the National Bureau of Standards and Department of Commerce in setting up this workshop. Thank you for the opportunity to say "hello" and I also wish you a very fruitful conference. Kenneth C. Henke, Jr. The main purposes of this workshop are: define the magnitude of the problem relevant to the energy demands imposed by buildings; suggest alternative techniques for conserving energy this summer and next winter that can be accomplished without any additional expenditures for equipment and products, plus those requiring only modest expenditures for readily obtainable materials and equipment; discuss ways that the State could employ for identifying or developing necessary consensus performance standards for State reference in such subject areas as insulation, fenestration, air infiltration control, site design, etc. It is my privilege to introduce Dr. J. E. Snell, Chief, Building Service Systems Section, Building Environment Division, National Bureau of Standards. Dr. Snell will preside as Session Chairman for the morning session. Mr. C. W. Phillips, Mr. F. J. Powell, and Dr. J. Hill, members of the Building Environment Division of the National Bureau of Standards, will make presentations on Energy Conservation Practices for Existing Buildings Actions to Save Energy this Summer and Next Winter, with specific emphasis on things that can be done without hardship or personal expenditure and things that require modest expenditures for readily obtainable materials. - Remarks and copies of slides and transparancies used can Dr. T. Kusuda, Mechanical Engineer, Thermal Engineering Section of the Building Environment Division of the National Bureau of Standards, will speak on Energy Conservation Practices for New Buildings, with specific emphasis on design opportunities. Remarks and copies of slides and transparancies used can Dr. J. E. Snell I am privileged to introduce Dr. Walter A. Meisen, Assistant Commissioner for Construction, Public Buildings Service, General Services Administration (GSA), who will present a paper entitled "An Overview of the Manchester Project." I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to you briefly about the General Services Administration's Manchester Project and other GSA activities in the energy conservation area. The General Services Administration is the business arm of the Government. We provide the supplies, equipment, transportation, records management, office space, and other services for the civilian side of Government. We have had a vital interest in energy conservation long before a shortage of energy gained national attention. Saving energy is good business even if there were no shortage. Energy is expensive and the costs are spiraling upward. All the normal energy sources are limited; they can be used up. Fuels purchased overseas have an adverse effect on the balance of payment and place our country in a position of dependence on others. The Manchester Project--as it has become known--is GSA's energy conservation demonstration project. It is a 175,000 square foot office building currently under design which will be constructed in Manchester, New Hampshire. The Manchester Project is an outgrowth of the Roundtable on Energy Conservation in Public Buildings, which was jointly sponsored by the National Bureau of Standards and the General Services Administration in May 1972. Experts from many organizations, including the private sector, were called together to explore ideas for energy conservation in the design, construction and operation of buildings. From this conference came the decision to select one project from GSA's inventory and make it an energy conservation demonstration building. I think most of you know something about the usual design process. The architect is given a program of requirements by the owner or developer. He develops a concept for the building design and once the design is pretty well established, brings in the engineer who determines the most suitable and economical mechanical-electrical systems for the building. This process works but energy conservation can easily get short-changed. We took a different approach for the Manchester Project. We put together a design team consisting of the usual architect-engineer, plus an energy conservation consultant, the National Bureau of Standards, and GSA as the owner. Energy conservation was made a prime design parameter to be considered equally with function, fire safety, life cycle cost, and aesthetics. Before developing a concept for the building, determinations were made as to features/systems/equipment which would contribute greatly toward a reduction in energy requirements. From the very beginning of the design process, energy saving possibilities were given major attention. We sought ideas from many sources including the schools of architecture and engineering in the colleges and universities throughout the country; from technical societies such as the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers; from other Federal agencies and other sources. These ideas, plus those originating with GSA, NBS, the architect-engineer and the energy conservation consultant, were categorized and evaluated. NBS made a whole series of computer studies designed to show the possibilities for energy savings through the control of the building orientation, fenestration, configuration, and insulation. The results of all these efforts were available at the beginning of the design process. The Manchester building will include various systems and will be instrumented to facilitate an evaluation of performace after occupancy. For example, one floor will have uniform lighting similar to that normally provided in most buildings these days; other floors will have non-uniform, task-oriented relocatable lighting; another may have lights built in the furniture; while one floor will have larger windows and be designed for the maximum use of natural illumination. Similarly, the building will be designed with different heating and air conditioning systems on the various floors for comparison purposes. When we began this project, we announced a goal of a 20 percent reduction in energy requirements over comparable modern office buildings subjected to similar climatic conditions. Despite some penalties inherent in multiple mechanical-electrical systems, we are already convinced that we will exceed that goal by a wide margin. Dr. Jim Hill from NBS, who will speak next, will provide you with details of how careful design of the building shell can make a substantial contribution to energy savings. Buildings must be designed to satisfy functional and aesthetic requirements. Not all the identified energy saving ideas can be included in a single project. Sometimes it will not be practical to go as far with some features as computer studies indicated desirable in order to reduce energy requirements. However, energy conservation must become a major factor in the design of all buildings. Sometimes demonstration projects--such as the Manchester Project--get too much attention and divert efforts that could be made concurrently elsewhere. We are trying to avoid that in GSA. I would like to take a few more minutes and tell you about other efforts underway to reduce energy demands. One current GSA research study deals with air change rates and outside air requirements. Outside air must be heated and cooled depend ing on the season. If a reduction can be made in the amount of outside air brought into buildings, a major impact can be made on energy usage. Also, we are currently taking a hard look at lighting levels. A substantial reduction in the power required for lighting would also substantially reduce the power required for air conditioning due to a corresponding reduction of lights. Already many new Federal buildings are being designed for non-uniform, task-oriented lighting. Solar energy seems very attractive. We have plans for an 8,000 square foot solar collector for a building to be constructed in Saginaw, Michigan. This collector is expected to provide over 70 percent of the building heating and all its hot water. The control of energy usage in existing buildings offers the potential for great energy savings which can become effective almost immediately. You heard about this area earlier today from other speakers. I would like to tell you a little about GSA's efforts in existing buildings before Dr. Jim Hill takes over to talk about computer studies for the design of new buildings. GSA is represented on an intergovernmental task force on energy conservation, which is chaired by a representative of the Department of the Interior. The principal representatives on this task force are from the Office of Management and Budget, Departments of Treasury, Commerce, Interior, Transportation, Defense, GSA, Federal Power Commission, Interstate Commerce Commission and the Council on Environmental Quality. Under the direction of the Office of Emergency Preparedness, GSA has been chairing a government conservation group which is composed of high-level representatives of the Federal agencies having real property management responsibilities. This group was responsible for developing an "action plan" for power conservation which is applicable to all Federal facilities, civilian as well as military, and includes such structures as office buildings, post offices, space research centers, AEC installations, and warehouses. It also has been adapted for use by State and local governments and copies have been furnished to the Governors of the 50 States. This plan recognizes that in order to conserve energy the full cooperation of every building occupant is required. It includes a "message to all Federal employees" describing what needs to be done, when it is to be done, and why. For example, building tenants are reminded that by just raising the thermostat setting from 72 to 75 degrees, turning off some of the corridor lights and closing venetian blinds or window drapes can reduce a building's electrical load during summer months anywhere from 5 to 10 percent, without noticeably affecting comfort conditions or impariing the efficiency of the employees in the building. |