ENERGY CONSERVATION AT HEADQUARTERS AND OTHER CIA/FEDERAL BUILDINGS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00988R000500090025-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 14, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 26, 2003
• Sequence Number: 25
• Publication Date: March 7, 1980
• Content Type: MF

Approver Release 2003/08/13: CIA-RDP85-W8R000500090025-2
7 March 1980
MEMORANDUM FOR: Suggestion & Achievment Awards Committee
SUBJECT Energy Conservation at Headquarters _ind
Other CIA/Federal Buildings
Attached is a suggestion for significantly reducing
the energy consumed in heating and cooling the head-
quarters building. This suggestion is probably also
applicable with sni,Ill modifications to other Agency
bui.ldin~g;s and to other 'oderal government buildings in
ccenora I . The cc:,t :,' wou] ri not be high; for headUUar is
they prc~babl1. ou ? i be less than what is presently
being spent to rcc:c.cor?1t the cafeteria complex. Til.~;
you for Coll 5i I'er o this suggestion. I am available
for conC:ultjiti n on thl.: :latter" :i well as upon ene`_r
con.-'cr""I ti on :.t' .?n
Approved For Release 2003/08/13 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000500090025-2
 Approver Release 2003/08/13: CIA-RDP85-.8R000500090025-2
SUGGESTION
I. The Problem
Energy conservation is a key national priority, yet
the CIA headquarters building is a heat sieve designed
and built in the era of cheap and inexhaustible energy.
On the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th floors there are
nearly 3,500 windows, each one of which loses about 2.75
million btu's per heating season, requiring the burning
of 25-28 gallons; of heating oil per window per heating
season. About 80 percent of this heat loss is pure waste.
At today's oil prices of roughly $1-/gallon this amounts
to a cost of $20/window/year or $70,000. Since heating
oil prices promise to double in the next 2-3 years,
savings would amount to about $150,000 per year in the
mid 1980s. Summer air conditioning savings would also be
sizeable, perhaps $50,000 to $75,000.
II. The Solution
Because of the large number of identical windows,
it will be possible to mass produce styrofoam insulated
shutters to fit on the inside of each of these windows.
These shutters would not interfere with the operation
of the windows or illumination during working hours, nor
would they intrude on available space within agency
offices. Closing of these shutters could be made a
portion of the normal daily security check, thus
assuring a 90 percent reduction in heat losses during
the 75 percent of the week that most offices are normally
unoccupied. Since heat losses are much higher at night
than during the day, in part because of radiation losses,
overall savings would average 80 percent or so.
III. The Shutters
These proposed shutters would hinge on each side of
the windows on the inside and open against the concrete
columns alongside each window, much like french or double
doors. Shutter construction would probably call for a
styrofoam core bonded to fibreglass or plastic sheets
(much like high quality ice chests are manufactured)
with weather stripped closures. Design should aim at an
"R" value of 8 to 10 per shutter, implying a core
Approved For Release 2003/08/13 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000500090025-2
 Approver Release 2003/08/13: CIA-RDP85-0#8R0, .6150 00090025-2
thickness of about 1 1/2". Based on a competitive bid
order of some 3,500 units, costs should run less than
$50- per unit. Installation costs should not exceed an
additional $50 per unit. A particularly cheap, but less
esthetically pleasing solution could be obtained by using
lift out styrofoam panels with magnetic catches that would
.seal on the window frames. This could probably be done
for as little as $10-$20 per window, with a payback period
of less than one heating season. These lift-out panels
would also be useable on the 2nd and 7th floors.
IV. The Payoff
With annual savings on heat alone of $20-/window
(probably $30-$40/window taking into account air
conditioning savings and the probable rise in fuel costs
during the interim) payback could he obtained in 3 years
or less. Total annual savings would total at least
$100,000 next year in heating costs and more than
$150,000-/year during the 1980s. Other conservation
investments could be made on the 2nd and the 7th floor
where heat losses through the windows are greater even
than on the other floors. Again, insulated shutters of
some kind probably offer the best solution. Double
glazing would be more expensive and would save only about
50 percent at best, compared to the 80 percent or so
available from shutters. As for the cafeteria, which is an
energy disgrace, no solution suggests itself. For, your
information, it probably takes more energy to heat this
area than it does for the entire rest of the headquarters
complex.
Approved For Release 2003/08/13 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000500090025-2
 aApprove 9r Release 2003/08/13: CIA-RDP85-09 8RO 00090025-2
Appendix A
Heat Loss Calculations
Each window on 3rd, 4th, 5th, & 6th floors
Heat Loss by Conduction
Dimensions 2.7' x 7'5'
Glass Area 20.6 ft2/window
Heating Degree Days - Washington DC = 4,200
Langley, Va = 4,500
= 4,500 x 24 hrs x 20.6 x 1.13
= 2,514,024 btu's/window/heating season
Heat Loss Through Infiltration
Along window edge length (crack) at assumed average winter
wind velocity of 5 mph
15' crack/window/
infiltration 8 ft3/hour/linear foot
Total infiltration equals 120 ft3/hour, or
518,000 ft3/heating season
Heat Loss = 518,000 x 25?F (average AT)
x 0.018 btu/ft3/?F
= 233,100 btu's/window/heating season
Total heat loss per window = 2,750,000 btu's
Approved For Release 2003/08/13 : CIA-RDP85-00988R000500090025-2