sustainable building fundamentals class

51
IEQ: Interior Environmental Quality CET 160; Fall 2013 Sustainable Building Fundamentals Guest Speaker: Marcel Harmon, PhD, PE, LEED-AP O+M GENUINE | PROGRESSIVE | ADVOCATES

Upload: marcel-harmon

Post on 11-Nov-2014

100 views

Category:

Design


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Guest lecture on the importance of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) as part of a sustainable building fundamentals class.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Sustainable building fundamentals class

IEQ: Interior Environmental Quality

CET 160; Fall 2013

Sustainable Building Fundamentals

Guest Speaker: Marcel Harmon, PhD, PE, LEED-AP O+M

GENUINE | PROGRESSIVE | ADVOCATES

Page 2: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Interior Environmental Quality Impacts

• Why IEQ is Important

• Personal Environmental Control

• Temperature / RH / Thermal Comfort

• Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)

Topics Covered

• Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)

• Acoustics

• Lighting / Views

Page 3: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Poor IEQ Negatively Impacts Energy Performance

32

41

66

5964

40

50

60

70

Why IEQ is Important

V. Sue Cleveland High School, Rio Rancho, NM

32

0

10

20

30

Design (energy

model)

Actual 2012-

2011

Target Finder

Average

Peer Group

Baseline Low

Peer Group

Baseline High

EUI

Page 4: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Why IEQ is ImportantIEQ Impacts Productivity/Performance and Health

• A study of Chicago and Washington, DC schools found that better school

facilities can add 3 to 4 percentage points to a school’s standardized test

scores, even after controlling for demographic factors.

Schneider, Mark. “Public School Facilities and Teaching: Washington, DC and Chicago,”

November 2002. A Report Prepared for the Neighborhood Capital Budget Group (NCBG).

Available at: http://www.ncbg.org/press/press111302.htm.

• Based on actual improvements in design in green schools and based on a very

Kats, G. 2006 Greening America’s Schools: Costs and Benefits. Capital E. www.cap-e.com.

• Based on actual improvements in design in green schools and based on a very

substantial data set on productivity and test performance of healthier, more

comfortable study and learning environments, a 3-5% improvement in learning

ability and test scores in green schools appears reasonable and conservative.

Page 5: Sustainable building fundamentals class

We are designing 21st century facilities for our stone-age minds and bodies.

Our mental machinery and

Why IEQ is ImportantWe have stone age minds and bodies

Our mental machinery and physiologies evolved for exterior environmental input, while growing up, learning and living in small communities.

Page 6: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Why IEQ is ImportantWe spend the vast majority of our time indoors

• We spend over 90% of our time indoors.

• Children spend 30-50 hours per week in and around school

facilities, on the bus, after school programs/events, etc. The

majority of that time is spent indoors.

• In drastically different • In drastically different

environments compared to

what we evolved in.

• Exposed to chemicals,

materials, HVAC, lighting,

etc. whose effects aren’t

thoroughly understood.

Page 7: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Exterior Connections, Health & Performance

Study of Taiwanese 8th graders found

that the addition of visible, leafy

plants at the back of the classroom

(6% of floorplan area) resulted in:

• significantly stronger self reported

feelings of preference, comfort,

Why IEQ is Important

feelings of preference, comfort,

and friendliness; and

• significantly fewer hours of sick

leave and punishment records

(+50% less)

Han, K. T. 2008. Influence of Limitedly Visible Leafy Indoor

Plants on the Psychology, Behavior, and Health of Students

at a Junior High School in Taiwan. Environment and

Behavior 41(5): 658-692

Page 8: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Ratio of

Construction cost to

Building operating costs to

Business costs + Salaries =8888

10101010

12121212

14141414

16161616Productivity and Health Costs

Why IEQ is ImportantProductivity/Performance & Health

Business costs + Salaries =

1 : 1.5 : 15

Over 20 – 25 years for a

typical service business

- Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment and the British Council for Offices, London, UK, 2005.

0000

2222

4444

6666

8888

ConstructionConstructionConstructionConstruction BldgBldgBldgBldgOperationsOperationsOperationsOperations

BusinessBusinessBusinessBusinessOperationsOperationsOperationsOperations

Relative CostRelative CostRelative CostRelative Cost

Page 9: Sustainable building fundamentals class

$29.20

$20.00

$25.00

$30.00

Estimated Annual Savings Per SF, By Facility

Duberstein U.S. Courthouse &

USPOIRS Brookhaven Customer

Service Ctr

Conrad Duberstein U.S. Courthouse and Post Office

Why IEQ is Important

$1.46$5.77$2.99

$0.00

$5.00

$10.00

$15.00

ECM Estimated

Utility Savings Per SF

Productivity / Health

Savings Per SF

20 times Utility

Savings

Service CtrNew Carrollton IRS Heaquarters

D'Amato U.S. Courthouse

Roosevelt U.S. Courthouse

U.S. Secret Service Memorial

HeadquartersReagan Federal Office Building

& ITC

Page 10: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Personal Control

Increased tenant environmental control have been found to

provide average measured workforce productivity gains of:

• 7.1% with lighting control

• 1.8% with ventilation control

• 1.2% with thermal control

Productivity Impacts

Kats, G., L. Alevantis, A. Berman, E. Mills, and J. Perlman, 2003.

The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building: A Report to

California’s Sustainable Building Task Force.

Page 11: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Occupancy Sensors

• Existing occupancy sensors

• Out of date and many in need of adjustment

• False-offs, false-ons

• Incorrect applications (wrong ceiling

Personal ControlOccupancy Sensors / Lighting Control

Conrad Duberstein U.S. Post

Office & Courthouse

• Incorrect applications (wrong ceiling height)

• Desire for local control to turn overhead lights off.

• Occupants spend on average 5 minutes per day dealing with the above issues (including time to refocus).

Page 12: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Personal ControlLighting Control

Communication, Education & Buy-In

Edward Gonzales Elementary School

ClassroomEdward Gonzales Elementary

School, Albuquerque, NM

Page 13: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Personal ControlTemperature Control & Thermal Comfort

V. Sue Cleveland Benefits of Personal Control

• Surveys, focus groups and interviews: Expressed strong

appreciation of and desire for local temperature control .

• Productivity increases with increasing personal control over

temperature and ventilation.

• Having control mitigates some of the negative perceptions • Having control mitigates some of the negative perceptions

associated with non-optimal HVAC system performance

• “being able to monitor my own classroom temperature

… is GREAT!!!”

Page 14: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Personal ControlTemperature Control & Thermal Comfort

V. Sue Cleveland Correlation Between Temperature Control and

Thermal Comfort Ratings

• Spearman’s Rho test: found a positive correlation between adult

temperature control effectiveness ratings and their thermal

comfort ratings.

• Contributing factor for the more positive adult thermal comfort

ratings.ratings.

Page 15: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Temp. / Thermal ComfortImpacts of Thermal Discomfort

• Energy Performance

• Productivity / Performance and Health

• Direct temperature impacts

• Thermal Comfort – Discomfort represented by non-

optimal temperature ranges have been shown to

decrease occupant performance / productivity on either

side of the optimal temperature range (68OF – 72OF) by

up to 9%.

• Wasted time contacting O&M

• Thermal comfort disputes

Source: Seppänen, O., W. J. Fisk, and Q. H. Lei. 2006. Effect of Temperature on Task Performance in Office Environment. Publication

No. LBNL-60946. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory , Berkeley, CA.

Source: Wargocki, P. and O. Seppänen, editors. 2006. Indoor Climate and Productivity in Offices, Guidebook No. 6. Rehva (Federation

of European Heating and Air-Conditioning Associations), Brussels, Belgium.

Page 16: Sustainable building fundamentals class

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f R

esp

on

ses

Hot & Cold Variations

Ground Floor South

1st Floor North

1st Floor South

2nd Floor North

2nd Floor South

3rd Floor North

100%

Generally Cool/Cold

Conrad Duberstein U.S. Post

Office & Courthouse

Temp. / Thermal ComfortImpacts of Thermal Discomfort

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f R

esp

on

ses

Building Floor/Area

3rd Floor South

4th Floor North

4th Floor South

5th Floor North

6th Floor North

7th Floor North

8th Floor North

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Re

spo

nse

s

Building Floor/Area

Ground Floor South

1st Floor North

1st Floor South

2nd Floor North

2nd Floor South

3rd Floor North

3rd Floor South

4th Floor North

4th Floor South

5th Floor North

6th Floor North

7th Floor North

8th Floor North

Page 17: Sustainable building fundamentals class

• Productivity/performance loss due to temperature variability: $67,500 annually.

• Productivity loss from contacting O&M: $825,000 annually.

Temp. / Thermal ComfortImpacts of Thermal Discomfort

Conrad Duberstein U.S. Post

Office & Courthouse

Page 18: Sustainable building fundamentals class

• Thermal comfort conflicts: Estimated to equate to an annual loss of $69,000 in productivity.

Temp. / Thermal ComfortImpacts of Thermal Discomfort

Conrad Duberstein U.S. Post

Office & Courthouse

Page 19: Sustainable building fundamentals class

• Being cold is the # 1 complaint.

• Personal space heaters used to gain control over space temperature.

• Additional electrical load estimated at

Temp. / Thermal ComfortImpacts of Thermal Discomfort

• Additional electrical load estimated at $14,000 - $26,600 annually.

Space Heater

Conrad Duberstein U.S. Post

Office & Courthouse

Page 20: Sustainable building fundamentals class

3.753.93 3.95 3.92

4.804.57

4.07

3.17

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

Q 13: Average Thermal Comfort Rating

Mean

Temp. / Thermal ComfortBuilding Age & Thermal Discomfort

3.17

1.00

2.00

3.00

Cordley Hillcrest Kennedy New York Pinckney Sunset Hill Group 1 Langston

Hughes

Mean

% Rating

of (4) or

Higher

58.3% 60.0% 62.5% 61.6% 86.8% 71.5% 65.3% 41.6%

Six of the school’s do not meet ASHRAE’s definition of a thermally acceptable environment in which at least

80% of the occupants find their spaces thermally acceptable.

Page 21: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Temp. / Thermal Comfort

V. Sue Cleveland HS Thermal Comfort Ratings

• Teachers, Staff and Administrators: Spaces are only

thermally acceptable (ASHRAE definition) during

the fall (ranges from 66% - 75% for other three

LEED & Thermal Discomfort

the fall (ranges from 66% - 75% for other three

seasons)

• Students: Not thermally acceptable during any

season (ranges from 32% - 51% for all four seasons).

Page 22: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Temp. / Thermal Comfort

• Air Movement/Velocity

• Activity Levels

• Clothing InsulativeProperties

Social/Cultural Influences on Thermal Comfort

• Air Temperature

• Mean Radiant

Temperature

• Relative Humidity

Page 23: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Temp. / Thermal ComfortClothing Variability

Page 24: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Temp. / Thermal ComfortAdapting to and Using Clothing Variability

Clothing Variability Signage

Computers

T-Shirt Logos

Flat

Screens

Smart Phones

T-Shirt Logos

Messages using images,

graphics, text, student

generated videos displaying /

promoting desired behavior

Spread using existing school

means or others – be

creative and relevant to your

audience

Page 25: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Temp. / Thermal ComfortEconomic Status, Clothing Variability and Thermal Comfort

Clothing Layering

• Layering of clothing is a district-wide approach.

• Students from low SES families own less clothing, limiting their ability to layer. New York

has clothing available for these students to use.

• Source of inequity between those schools with high percentages of low SES families and

those without:

Pinckney Clothing Observed: 8/27/2012Cordley Clothing Observed: 9/14/2012

Page 26: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Temp. / Thermal ComfortPlug Load Equipment & Thermostats

Heat from copier next to thermostat

may be creating “false” call for

cooling.

Page 27: Sustainable building fundamentals class

U.S. Business IAQ Improvements:

• save up to $58 billion in lost sick time • save additional $200 billion in worker

performance.

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)Savings to U.S. Businesses

performance.

- Fisk, W. G. 2000, Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency. Annual Review of Energy and Environment 25(1):537-566. Later updated for 2002 dollars.

Page 28: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)Impacts

• Schools with high IAQ total scores and a high Healthy Greenness School

Index (GSI) were more likely to have high student attendance rates (36% and

22% respectively).

• Schools with well maintained air filters were also 42% more likely to have

good 4th grade academic performance.

Lin, S., C. Kielb, A. Orsini & N. Muscatiello The Evaluation of Green School Building

Attributes and Their Effect on the Health and Performance of Students and Teachers in Attributes and Their Effect on the Health and Performance of Students and Teachers in

New York State. Final Project Report - Proposal Number: #147 funded by the US Green

Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8627.

Illinois Healthy Schools Campaign, “Apparently Size Doesn’t Matter: Two Illinois School

Districts Show Successful IAQ Management.” School Health Watch, Summer 2003.

http://healthyschoolscampaign.org/news/newsletter/2003-summer_HSC-newsletter.pdf.

Also see: US Environmental Protection Agency. “IAQ Tools for Schools,” December 2000

(Second Edition). Available at: http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/.

• An analysis of two school districts in Illinois found that student attendance

rose by 5% after incorporating cost effective indoor air quality improvements.

Page 29: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)Landscaping Impacts on IAQ

Increased Cleaning & Poorer IAQ

VE/Defer Landscaping

V. Sue Cleveland High School,

Rio Rancho, NM

Page 30: Sustainable building fundamentals class

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)Construction Impacts on IAQ

Classroom Teacher: the trains leave their engines

[idling] and the smoke enters the classroom

Fall Winter Spring Summer

Teachers & Staff 3.30 3.22 3.67 3.63

Standard Deviation 1.42 1.39 0.87 1.06

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

Teachers/Admin/Staff average ratings of IAQ

in their primary classroom or work area

(standard deviation also shown)Gap between screen frame and window

frame

Page 31: Sustainable building fundamentals class

4.674.43 4.43

5.25

5.00

6.00

7.00

Q 17: Average Air Quality Rating

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)Variability of IAQ w/in Same Organization

Lawrence, KS School District

3.75 3.72 3.763.97

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

Cordley Hillcrest Kennedy New York Pinckney Sunset Hill Group 1 Langston

Hughes

Mean

Page 32: Sustainable building fundamentals class

• CO2 maximum of 1,000 ppm, and not exceeding the outdoor concentration

by more than about 650 ppm when the exterior outdoor CO2

concentration is 380 ppm.

• Based on studies linking CO2 levels above these limits to drowsiness,

lethargy, poor concentration, respiratory ailments, headaches, and other

negative health impacts.

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)ASHRAE Design Standards for Schools

negative health impacts.

• These negative impacts are not necessarily a direct result of the CO2 levels

found indoors (typically less than 5000 ppm), but the higher pollution rates

in general that occur as a result of not having enough outside air, or

adequate ventilation.

• ASHRAE ventilation requirements are intended to provide enough fresh air

to dilute interior pollutants, and the CO2 levels end up being a good way to

measure if you have adequate ventilation inside your buildings.

Page 33: Sustainable building fundamentals class

4,000 4,000

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)Variability of IAQ w/in Same Organization

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

CO

2 P

PM

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

CO

2 P

PM

Kennedy Langston Hughes

Page 34: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsImpacts of Noise and Inaudibility

• Center for the Built Environment’s survey of 23,450 respondents

from 142 buildings found over 50% of cubicle occupants (30% of

private office occupants) expressed that acoustics impact their work.

Jensen, K. L., Arens, E., & Zagreus, L. (2005). Acoustical Quality in Office Workstations,

as Assessed by Occupant Surveys. Indoor Air, (pp. 2401-2405).

• When conversational noise was reduced and speech privacy • When conversational noise was reduced and speech privacy

increased,

• the ability of office workers to focus on tasks improved by 48%,

• performance of tasks relating to accuracy and memory

improved by 10% and

• the physical symptoms of stress such as high blood pressure and

increased heart rate were reduced by 27%

Sykes, D. M. (2004). Productivity: How Acoustics Affect Workers’ Performance In Offices

& Open Areas. Retrieved February 1, 2009, from Office Sound Masking Solutions, by

Speech Privacy Systems. www.speechprivacysystems.com/files/Productivity.pdf.

Page 35: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsJulian Treasure: Why architects need to use their ears

• http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_treasure_why_architects_need_to_use_th

eir_ears.html

Page 36: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsStandards / Recommendations & Impacts

American National Standards Institute (ANSI) S12.60-2002, Acoustical Performance Criteria,

Design Requirements and Guidelines for Schools standard

• Unoccupied classroom levels must not exceed 35 dBA

• The signal-to-noise ratio (the difference between the teacher's voice and the background

noise) should be at least +15 dB at the child's ears.

• Unoccupied classroom reverberation must not surpass 0.6 seconds in smaller classrooms

or 0.7 seconds in larger rooms.

World Health Organization (WHO, 1980) World Health Organization (WHO, 1980)

• recommends a background noise level lower than 45 db(A) for good speech intelligibility

--the ability to understand others.

ASHRAE

• suggests a noise level less than 45db(A) for open plan offices

Impacts

• Intelligibility, understanding and learning

• Focus and concentration

• Stress

• Voice strain

• Privacy

Page 37: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsRelationships with Building System Performance

ANSI/ASA S12.60-

2010 Sound

Measurements

Analysis: ANSI/ASA S12.60-2010 PERMITS GREATEST WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL OF 35 DB FOR CORE LEARNING SPACES LESS

THAN 10,000 GSF AND 40 DB FOR CORE LEARNING SPACES GREATER THAN 10,000 GSF . THE LARGE CORE LEARNING AREAS

ARE SUBSTANTIALLY OVER THE PERMITTED TOLERANCES, AND THE HVAC IS SPECIFICALLY SCHEDULED “OFF” WHEN THESE

CLASSROOMS ARE OCCUPIED.

V. Sue Cleveland

High School, Rio

Rancho, NM

Page 38: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsRelationships to building system performance

High ceiling spaces without lay-in ceilings

• Described as noisy, with decreased audibility

• Supported by instantaneous sound level

measurements

• Some of these spaces set to “unoccupied” in BAS

system during class periods to minimize

distracting noisedistracting noise

• But data loggers demonstrated that this could

result in a less thermally comfortable space

• These spaces may require:

• Addition of sound absorbing surfaces

• T&B

• Duct acoustic liners or other HVAC sound

control methods

V. Sue Cleveland High School, Rio Rancho, NM

Page 39: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsRelationships with Building System Performance

4.75

5.36 5.365.17

5.36

3.86

5.17 5.17

5.00

6.00

7.00

Q19: Average Intelligibility Rating

3.86

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

Cordley Hillcrest Kennedy New York Pinckney Sunset Hill Group 1 Langston

Hughes

Mean

Lawrence, KS School District

Page 40: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsRelationships with spatial restrictions

Survey Quotes:

• Kennedy (Early Childhood Special Ed): “There are four of us

sharing ‘office’ space which we make phone calls and also

connected to a therapy space -- it can be very overwhelming at

times and difficult to concentrate on all of the paperwork that we

are required to do.”

• New York (Resource Room): “I share a resource room and at times

we have four different groups being taught in this space. It gets

distracting for all students and staff at times like this.”

Lawrence, KS School District

Page 41: Sustainable building fundamentals class

AcousticsRelationships with Spatial Restrictions

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

Lawrence, KS School

District

Sunset Hill 5th Grade Classroom

• This 5th grade classroom has 28 desks. Provides example of the crowding that occurs in the

district’s elementary schools, particularly the upper grades.

• Desks end up taking up the vast majority of the floor area and t makes it difficult to find

enough space to work in small groups (and still maintain some level of separation between

the small groups).

• Exacerbates noise and thermal comfort issues, negatively impacting focus/concentration.

# Approximate location of

small group activities plus

the # of students engaged

in those activities.

223

Page 42: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Lighting / ViewsDaylighting Impacts

Compared to little or no daylighting,

classrooms with appropriate

daylighting may increase the rate of

student learning by:

• 20% in math

• 26% in reading• 26% in reading

Heschong Mahone Group. 1999. Daylighting in Schools:

An Investigation into the Relationship Between Daylight

and Human Performance. Report submitted to Pacific Gas

and Electric. http://www.h-m-g.com.

Page 43: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Lighting / ViewsView Impacts

28% of U.S. workers say they can’t see the outdoors from their work

space; they’re also 86% more likely to be actively disengaged than

those who have a view of the outside from their desk or station

Gallup

Workers in a Call Center were found to process calls 6% to 12% faster

when they had the best possible view versus those with no view. when they had the best possible view versus those with no view.

Heschong Mahone Group, Inc. (2003). Windows and offices: a study of student

performance and the indoor environment. California Energy Commission:

Sacramento, California.

Office workers were found to perform 10% to 25% better on tests of

mental function and memory recall when they had the best possible

view versus those with no view.Heschong Mahone Group, Inc. (2003). Windows and offices: a study of student

performance and the indoor environment. California Energy Commission:

Sacramento, California.

Page 44: Sustainable building fundamentals class

CLERESTORY WINDOW

SEGMENTED LIGHT SHELF,

SUSPENDED FLUORESCENT

LIGHT FIXTURE

REFLECTED DAYLIGHT

Lighting / ViewsPoor Daylighting Quality & Energy Performance

SEGMENTED LIGHT SHELF,

COMPOSED OF LINEAR

SLATS SEPARATED BY SMALL

GAPS

DIRECT SUNLIGHT ENTERING

THROUGH GAPS (SEE

ASSOCIATED PATTERN ON

WALL)

Edward Gonzales

Elementary,

Albuquerque, NM

Page 45: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Lighting / ViewsWindow Size/Placement, Views & Impacts on Performance

and Social Conflicts

Edward Gonzales

Elementary,

Albuquerque, NM

Page 46: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Visibility Issues

• Lack of Adequate Daylighting

Control

• South Facing Windows and Some

East/West Windows: Shades with

relatively high openness value.

Lighting / ViewsValue Engineering, Daylighting Quality & Productivity Impacts

V. Sue Cleveland High School,

Rio Rancho, NM

Ad Hoc Solutions

• Remaining Windows: No

shades, curtains or blinds

• No Other Means of Daylight

Control

Page 47: Sustainable building fundamentals class

V. Sue Cleveland High School, Rio Rancho, NM

• Estimated quantitative impacts from lack of adequate

daylighting control

Estimated Teacher/Staff Annual Productivity

Delta Due to Lack of Adequate Daylighting

Lighting / ViewsValue Engineering, Daylighting Quality & Productivity Impacts

Delta Due to Lack of Adequate Daylighting

Control -$169,457

Estimated Impact of Glare on Student Math

Scores -1.50%

Estimated Impact of Glare on Student Reading

Scores --0.91%

Page 48: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Lawrence, KS School District – Available Daylight

Lighting / ViewsDaylighting Quality and Productivity/Performance Impacts

Deerfield, Broken Arrow Cordley, Hillcrest, Kennedy,

New York, Hillcrest, Sunset Hill,

Schwegler, WoodlawnLangston Hughes,

Prairie Park, Quail Run,

Sunflower

Potential 20% delta in math scores

Potential 26% delta in reading scores

Page 49: Sustainable building fundamentals class

Solatube diffuser Solatube dome

Lighting / ViewsLighting Quality, Control and Commissioning

Solatube diffuser in

classroom with dampers

closed. All others in

classroom were open.Hurley Elementary,

Hurley, NM

Page 50: Sustainable building fundamentals class

ReferencesAmerican National Standards Institute (ANSI) S12.60-2002, Acoustical Performance Criteria,

Design Requirements and Guidelines for Schools standard

http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/American-National-Standard-on-Classroom-Acoustics/

http://acousticalsociety.org/about_acoustics/acoustics_of_classrooms

Committee to Review and Assess the Health and Productivity Benefits of Green Schools

(National Research Council, 2006:65-66).

Heschong Mahone Group. 1999. Daylighting in Schools: An Investigation into the Relationship

Between Daylight and Human Performance. Report submitted to Pacific Gas and Electric.

http://www.h-m-g.com.

Illinois Healthy Schools Campaign, “Apparently Size Doesn’t Matter: Two Illinois School Districts

Show Successful IAQ Management.” School Health Watch, Summer 2003.

http://healthyschoolscampaign.org/news/newsletter/2003-summer_HSC-newsletter.pdf.

Also see: US Environmental Protection Agency. “IAQ Tools for Schools,” December 2000

(Second Edition). Available at: http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/.

Kanarek, R. (1997) Psychological Effects of Snacks and Altered Meal Frequency. British Journal

of Nutrition 77, Suppl. 1:S105-S120.

Kats, G. 2006 Greening America’s Schools: Costs and Benefits. Capital E. www.cap-e.com.

Kats, G., L. Alevantis, A. Berman, E. Mills, and J. Perlman, 2003. The Costs and Financial

Benefits of Green Building: A Report to California’s Sustainable Building Task Force.

Page 51: Sustainable building fundamentals class

ReferencesLin, S., C. Kielb, A. Orsini & N. Muscatiello The Evaluation of Green School Building Attributes

and Their Effect on the Health and Performance of Students and Teachers in New York State.

Final Project Report - Proposal Number: #147 funded by the US Green Building Council.

http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8627.

Schneider, Mark. “Public School Facilities and Teaching: Washington, DC and Chicago,”

November 2002. A Report Prepared for the Neighborhood Capital Budget Group (NCBG).

Available at: http://www.ncbg.org/press/press111302.htm.

Smith, A. and A. Maben (1992) Effects of Sleep Deprivation, Lunch, and Personality on

Performance, Mood, and Cardiovascular Function. Physiology & Behavior 54:967-972

Treasure, J. Why architects need to use their ears. TED Talk

http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_treasure_why_architects_need_to_use_their_ears.html

USA Today Special Report: The Smokestack Effect - Toxicity and America’s Schools

http://content.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/smokestack/index

Why Environmental Health Matters in Schools - EPA Webinar: 10/17/2012 -

https://esbuildings.webex.com/mw0307l/mywebex/default.do?siteurl=esbuildings.

Wilson, D. S. (2011) The Neighborhood Project: Using Evolution to Improve My City, One Block

at a Time. Hachette Book Group, New York, NY.

Wilson, D. S., D. Tumminelli O'Briena and A. Sesmac (2009) Human Prosociality From an

Evolutionary Perspective: Variation and Correlations at a City-Wide Scale. Evolution and

Human Behavior 30:190–200.