High Performing Buildings - Spring 2009 - (Page 34) WastE rEduction t h r o u g h r E c yc l i n g The native grass in a bioswale requires no irrigation and no mowing. Metric Annual Cost implementation Cost rebates Annual savings energy savings simple Payback recycling costs — $ 42,828 — $ 21,888 — 2 Years present based on our purchased lighting. We wanted to reduce the amount of mercury in the building. The building lighting primarily uses T-8 fluorescent tubes and compact fluorescent bulbs. We worked with a vendor to conduct the initial survey of existing fixtures. Another vendor developed a replacement plan for new fluorescent fixtures that contained a lower level of mercury. Water Efficiency Water is a precious resource in our country, and even more so in our northern California climate. In addition to earning LEED points for increased water efficiency, VSP wanted to reach a level of significant water savings. We started by auditing our irrigation and domestic water use through submetering. To improve our ability to determine where our water was being used in the building, we installed submeters on our coolspring 2009 VSP installed aerators on the restroom lavatories, installed dual flush valves on water closets and replaced 50 water closets with low-flow water closets. These changes plus other water-saving measures resulted in annual savings of $5,111. ing towers and café. We then began auditing the plumbing fixtures. To VSP’s surprise, the plumbing fixtures were not as efficient as we thought. We ended up replacing several toilets and installed aerators on the restroom lavatories to reduce water use. Determining our irrigation efficiency was more difficult. The LEED 34 HigH Performing Buildings
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.