Open Collections

Sustainable patio heaters at the Perch

University of British Columbia. Sustainability Office

This project was done for APSC 261, an Applied Science undergraduate course at the University of British Columbia. APSC 261 deals with the “interdisciplinary enquiry known as STS (Science, Technology and Society)” (Paterson, 2014a). In this 3 month course, we spent most of the time working on a Sustainability Project, which is the subject of this project report. This project is part of UBC’s SEEDS (Social Ecological Economic Development Studies) Program, which facilitates the collaboration of UBC staff, students, and faculty to “address real issues pertaining to the sustainable operation of units on the UBC campus” (Paterson, 2014a). Our group selected and completed an APSC 261 Sustainability Project called ‘Patio Heaters’ in the September 2014 term, working with the Perch Restaurant of the newly constructed Student Union Building (UBC SUB). As stated in the UBC SEEDS Project Proposal Form (Paterson, 2014b), the goal of our chosen project was to research and find a more sustainable alternative heating solution to propane heaters, for purpose of extending the months of operation of the outdoor patio for the Perch restaurant in the new SUB. During this project, our main contacts were Chiyi Tam of AMS Sustainability and David Gill, Seeds Coordinator. The Perch restaurant is situated on the top floor of the new SUB and has an outdoor patio that is suited for outdoor dining during the summer months. The management has changed its initial plan to only use the patio in the summer, and wants to open the patio for use during the spring and fall months, on appropriate days. This involves operating the patio in less-than-ideal conditions, such as chilly or windy weather, though not when it is raining. The baseline heating solution that was initially considered as a heating solution were to use propane heaters. However, the unsustainable fuel source of this solution conflicts with the UBC Alma Mater Society’s green branding under which the SUB and the Perch Restaurant falls under. Furthermore, propane heaters may give off an odor of propane, which decreases user comfort, another priority of the restaurant’s stakeholders. The stakeholders stated that they would consider any option that is presented to them, as long as it is economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable. This project was completed over the period of about 2 months, for an undergraduate university course at the University of British Columbia. Through the UBC SEEDS program, students are given the opportunity to share with the UBC community their research, findings, opinions, conclusions and recommendations. Thus, it should be kept in mind that this report is a student project and not an official document of UBC. Moreover, this reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. For up-to-date information, the UBC SEEDS Coordinator can be contacted mentioned in a report or about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report. In this investigation, we operated under the accounting framework known as the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) approach. The TBL approach considers not only the economic impact, but also the social and environmental aspects of a project (Slaper and Hall, 2011). We investigated the impacts in each aspect for each of our proposed solutions, and compared them to the traditional propane patio heaters. To conduct this investigation, both primary and secondary sources were required for our analysis. To get a sense of existing alternatives to propane heaters, we used internet search engines (google.com, etc.) to find models and manufacturers’ websites of different heater heating solutions. In doing so, we familiarized ourselves with the topic and identified some of the readily available market alternatives. We also brainstormed possible questions for the Q&A session with our stakeholder, Chiyi Tam. Lastly, we gathered data on our UBC peers’ thoughts on the topic by creating and distributing an online survey. This proved to be a valuable primary source of information for understanding the social aspect of our problem. The results of the survey are discussed in section 3. After analyzing the responses we got from the survey it was clear that not extending the operation hours of the patio is another option, since the number of people who would use the patio significantly decreased when the temperature dropped past 10°C. Moreover, if there was a chance of rain, or it was raining, the number of people interested in eating on the patio also decreased. Taking this into account, along with the weather analysis we completed, there was presents a strong argument of not using patio heaters to extend the lifespan of a patio. In addition, the survey also confirmed for us that most people would prefer to be heated by an electric heater and that sustainability and safety is a key issue to potential customers. Finally, we did a comprehensive comparison of several models of heaters with different specifications, using a TBL assessment that includes economic, social, and environmental factors that pointed towards electric (infrared) heaters being one of the best choices. From the data collected our assessment using the TBL framework, along with all of our findings in the initial research, our final recommendation is to use freestanding electric heaters; there are several commercial models available as viable heating options and good alternatives to propane heaters. Ultimately, this is because electric heaters provide many benefits over gas and battery powered options. As showed in the analysis electric infrared heat provides a balance of flexibility, efficiency, and sustainability not offered by other models. Electric powered heaters also require less overall maintenance and setup when compared to either propane or battery powered options. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

Text

University of British Columbia. APSC 261; UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report

Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library

10.14288/1.0224022

Applied Science, Faculty of

Unreviewed

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ca/