Energy use and savings potential for laboratory fume hoods

Energy

Volumn 30, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 1859-1864

  Mills, Evan ^a   Sartor, Dale ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AIR CONDITIONING; COST EFFECTIVENESS; FLOW OF FLUIDS; HEATING; LABORATORIES; REGULATORY COMPLIANCE; SAFETY DEVICES; STANDARDS; TURBULENCE; VENTILATION;

AIRFLOW RATES; DESIGN STRATEGIES; FUME HOODS; INFRASTRUCTURE;

FUME CONTROL;

ENERGY USE;

EID: 12444268946     PISSN: 03605442     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2004.11.008     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Saunders GT. Laboratory fume hoods-a user's manual. New York: Wiley; 1993.
2. Bell G, Sartor D, Mills E. The Berkeley hood: development and commercialization of an innovative high-performance laboratory fume hood. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; 2002 (Report No. 48983).
3. Mills E, Rosenfeld A. Consumer non-energy benefits as a motivation for making energy-efficiency improvements, Energy; 1996;21(7/8):707-20.
4. Pye, M, McKane, A. enhancing shareholder value: making a more compelling energy efficiency case to industry by quantifying non-energy benefits. In: 1999 Summer study on energy efficiency in industry, Washington DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.
5. Worrell E, Laitner JA, Ruth M, Finman H. Productivity benefits of industrial energy efficiency measures. Energy 2003; 28(11):1081-98.
6. Monsen RR. Practical solutions to retrofitting existing fume hoods and laboratories. ASHRAE Trans 1989;95.
7. Kjelgaard JM. Engineering weather data. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2001.
8. Weale J, Rumsey PH, Sartor D, Lee LE. Laboratory low-pressure-drop design. ASHRAE J 2002;44(8):38-42.