PAGE 1 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Building Energy Benchmarks THE WEIDT GROUP.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
New Paradigms for Measuring Savings
Advertisements

Estimating Key Parameters for the Retail Plug-Load Portfolio (RPP) Program: Recommended Methodological Approaches EM&V, Residential Programs, Products.
1 Privileged and Confidential © 2014 The Weidt Group Privileged and Confidential / © 2014 The Weidt Group GreenStep Cities Workshop Presenter: Katie Schmitt.
University of Liège Faculty of Applied Sciences Thermodynamics Laboratory Workshop “Commissioning and Auditing of Buildings and HVAC Systems” Use of a.
Energy Savings Opportunities in Controls, Lighting, Air Conditioning, Water Heating and Refrigeration Chuck Thomas, P.E. CEM Lead Engineer.
ENPM808W Energy Efficiency/Energy Audit and Conservation Week III, Lecture 1: Energy Audit Procedures and Energy Benchmarking Dr. Michael Ohadi Spring.
Plans for Commercial Building Benchmarking R&D in 2006 Martha Brook California Energy Commission PIER Buildings Program presented to the EPAC on December.
MENG 547 LECTURE 3 By Dr. O Phillips Agboola. C OMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL BUILDING ENERGY AUDIT Why do we audit Commercial/Industrial buildings Important.
Action-Oriented Benchmarking Paul A. Mathew, Ph.D. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley California Using CEUS Data to Identify and Prioritize.
Steven Carlson, P.E. CDH Energy Corp. Evansville, WI ASHRAE Chicago, 2006 Energy Benchmarking.
The Power of Information: Rating and Disclosing Building Energy Performance Alexandra Sullivan US EPA, ENERGY STAR December 2, 2009.
Energy Savings with EnergyEdge Brandi McManus, Energy Services Manager – MR&D.
Morofsky1 Low-energy Building Design, Economics and the Role of Energy Storage Canadian possibilities based on the Model National Energy Code for Buildings.
Portfolio Manager 101. Learning Objectives In this session, you will become familiar with EPA’s ENERGY STAR ® Portfolio Manager ® tool and learn how to:
SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS Ashok Kumar Abhilash Vijayan Department of Civil Engineering.
Introduction to An ASHRAE Professional Development Course Cutting Utility Costs through Strategic Energy Management Draft 01/21/06 1.
Benchmarking State Buildings Karen Herter, Heschong-Mahone Group (HMG) Mike Langley, Dept. of General Services (DGS) April 8, 2008.
Portfolio Manager—ICBA Members ENERGY STAR  Tools For Benchmarking and Tracking Energy Use.
ENERGY STAR Jean Lupinacci, Director ENERGY STAR Commercial and Industrial Branch Climate Protection Partnerships Division US EPA.
Portfolio Manager ® Learning Objectives In this session, you will become familiar with EPA’s ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager tool and learn how to:
Energy Management 101 Lance Stewart Facilities Maintenance Manager/Energy Manager City of Charlottesville, Virginia.
Slide 1 B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N Variable Capacity Heat Pump RTF Sub-Committee November 16, 2011 Mira Vowles, P.E., CEM.
Discussion of Mexican Adaptation of ENERGY STAR Methodology CEC Workshop Mexico City March 2013 Michael Zatz and Alexandra Sullivan ENERGY STAR Commercial.
The Path to Net Zero Energy Buildings Arkansas Chapter ASHRAE February 2008 Bill Harrison.
Steven Carlson, P.E. CDH Energy Corp. Evansville, WI ACE06 San Antonio, 2006 Development of a Utility Energy Index.
Managing Operational Energy in Buildings
Vicki Worden GBI Commercial Programs
June 4, 2002 Cindy Jacobs EPA E NERGY S TAR Buildings E NERGY S TAR Greening the Government.
Connectivity Week Santa Clara Convention Center May 23, 2011.
State and Local Governments Leveraging ENERGY STAR in Energy Policy.
1 SB 2030 Project Advisory Group June, 2009 Introduction and Overview John Carmody, CSBR Development of a Building Energy Benchmarking Protocol Tom McDougall.
© 2009 AirAdvice, Inc. Increasing Profitability Through Energy Services A Comprehensive Program To Deliver Energy and Sustainability Services.
J.B. Speed School of Engineering University of Louisville KEEPS Energy Management Toolkit Step 2: Assess Performance & Opportunities Toolkit 2C: School.
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 2015 All rights reserved.Answers for infrastructure and cities. Data collection for city baseline and projections for Helsinki.
Common Carbon Metric for Measuring Energy Use & Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Building Operations A tool developed by GHG Protocol and UNEP-SBCI.
Landscape for Deemed Lighting Workpapers Building Code and Voluntary Program Relationship Building Code Changes Driven by Big Vision Voluntary Program.
1 Overview of a K-12 Utility Benchmark Study and Survey Supported by the Arkansas Dept. of Education and the ADED – Energy Office Darin W. Nutter, Ph.D.,
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Slide 1 Direct Use of Natural Gas Economic Fuel Choices from the Regional Power System and Consumer’s Perspective.
1 DOE Data Center Energy Efficiency Program and Tool Strategy Paul Scheihing U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
© 2009 AirAdvice, Inc. Energy Benchmarking The On-Ramp to Delivering Energy Services.
WE EXIST TO BUILD GREAT THINGS Butte College – Instructional Arts Paperless Project Cost Analysis & Environmental Impact Case Study.
NEET Workgroup #3 - Residential Subgroup Snohomish County PUD November 2008.
1 Holly Krambeck, Carbon Finance Unit; World Bank 27 May 2010 Using Inventory Tools to Support Energy Efficient Cities Citywide Methodology Transport Module.
Developing Building Energy Use Intensity Benchmarks for Standard 100 Energy Targets Terry Sharp, PE, CEM Building Technologies Research & Integration Center.
Phoenix Convention Center Phoenix, Arizona Facility Energy Audits Mike Gutowski Johnson Controls August 12, 2015 Agency Energy ManagerEnergy Audits: Implementing.
© OECD/IEA INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY Worldwide Trends in Energy Use and Efficiency Key Insights from IEA Indicator Analysis ENERGY INDICATORS.
Increase Efficiency with Energy to Care and the Sustainability Roadmap:
1 Assessing heating and cooling demands in buildings using the AUDITAC Customer Advising Tool (CAT) Dr Ian Knight Cardiff University UK.
1 Data Center Energy Efficiency Metrics ASHRAE June 24, 2008 Bill Tschudi Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Energy Design of Buildings using Thermal Mass Cement Association of Canada July 2006.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council A Look At The Council’s Conservation Planning Methodology and Assumptions A Look At The Council’s Conservation.
X Hospital’s Sustainable Energy Management Plan. Prescription for Energy Savings Agenda 1. Overview of Duke Energy’s Prescription for Energy Savings 2.
ENERGY STAR ® SALES ASSOCIATE TRAINING Decorative Light Strings.
Week 8 End Use Breakdown. Elements of Breakdown Understand various methods to calculate energy use and savings Understand the purpose and various types.
Week 13 Introduction to compiling an energy efficiency audit report and Writing the utility analysis section.
Data Center Energy Use, Metrics and Rating Systems Steve Greenberg Energy Management Engineer Environmental Energy Technologies Division Lawrence Berkeley.
Multifamily Energy Calculator Rapid modeling of mid-rise residential projects Greg Arcangeli | Graduate Engineer | LEED AP BD+C Cristina Woodings | Graduate.
Portfolio Manager ® Learning Objectives In this session, you will become familiar with EPA’s ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager tool and learn how to:
Data Analytics – A Cost Effective Approach to Reducing Operating Costs Automatically “find what matters” in the data from building equipment systems and.
ENERGY STAR Congregations and Portfolio Manager Program Review Jerry Lawson, National Manager ENERGY STAR Congregations Steve Bell (Contractor) Energy.
Road to Net Zero- Corey Chinn, PE Sustainable facilities do not have to be complex or expensive “Technical skill is the mastery of complexity, while creativity.
1 How good are building simulation models? Comparing simulated and actual building energy consumption at the circuit level Brock Glasgo, PhD Student Engineering.
Energy Efficiency: Key to High Performance Buildings Jean Lupinacci U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) White House Summit on Federal Sustainable.
2011 SMA Energy Bowl Final Results and Awards February 8, 2012 Joe Abernathy President, SMA VP of Stadium Operations Busch Stadium.
Fort Stanwix National Monument Energy Audit Contract
The GRC’s Lab Benchmarking Project
Killeen Independent School District Energy Efficiency Report
ANSI/ASHRAE 90.4 Energy Standard for Data Centers
Town Facilities Benchmarking and GHG Emissions Update
Unemployment Insurance Integrity Performance Measures
Presentation transcript:

PAGE 1 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Building Energy Benchmarks THE WEIDT GROUP

PAGE 2 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Presentation Agenda  Introduction  Comparison of building energy benchmark methods and systems  Comparison of energy use indexes for different benchmark systems for 13 different building types  Recommended Method for Developing Minnesota Benchmarks  How to Disseminate the Sustainable Buildings 2030 Energy Benchmark System

PAGE 3 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Introduction  The Benchmark sets the starting point for CO2 Reduction against which each subsequent target is measure  Targets: Reduce CO2 60% by 2010, 90% by 2030 Sustainable 2030 Benchmarks 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent CO2 Emissions

PAGE 4 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Criteria for a Good Benchmarking system  Easy to use and understand  Accurate – for our climate  Consistent – methodology for all benchmarks  Comprehensive – for all buildings we build and can account for the specific program criteria unique to each building

PAGE 5 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Benchmarking Methods in Use Today  Comparing a building to itself – the “tracking” or “baseline” approach  Empirical model from a sample of other similar buildings in a population – Target Finder / Energy Star approach  Results of an energy simulation model with certain pre-defined baseline characteristics, such as meeting an energy code or standard – current Minnesota B3 Benchmarking and DOE method

PAGE 6 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP What are Metrics used to Benchmark Buildings?  For cars we use: Miles per gallon  For lighting efficiency we use: Lumens per Watt  For Cooling equipment efficiency we use: kW/ ton  For buildings we use: Energy Use Intensity (EUI) typically expressed in units of Annual energy consumption per floor area per year kBtu / Square feet / year or maybe … CO 2 / Square foot/ year

PAGE 7 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Research Existing Building Energy Benchmarking Systems  Target Finder / Portfolio Manager  15 different building types – 5 are different hotel types  Minnesota B3 Benchmarking system  Over 50 different building types based of Current MN 1993 Energy Code  New DOE Benchmarking system  Same types as Target Finder based on ASHRAE Energy Code

PAGE 8 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Comparison of Benchmark System Features  See Figure 1 System Features on Page 6 Benchmark GoalsDOE Benchmarks Architecture 2030 EPA Target Finder Architecture 2030 EPA National Averages B3 Benchmarking Program Easy to useYes Accurate Yes, for the available building types NoYes ConsistentYes Will vary based on new CBEC surveys Yes Comprehensive 16 building types representing a mix of public and private sector types. 15 building types representing a mix of public and private sector types. 18 building types representing a mix of public and private sector types Over 50 building/space types covering full range of public/ private sector types

PAGE 9 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Comparison of Benchmark System Features  See Figure 1 System Features on Page 6 Benchmark Goals DOE Benchmarks Architecture 2030 EPA Target Finder Architecture 2030 EPA National Averages B3 Benchmarking Program Modify Benchmark based on operational characteristics NoYesNoYes Modify Benchmark based on special use conditions of the building NoYesNoYes Mixed-use building types No Yes, within available building types NoYes Geographic location (weather determinants) 16 locations nationally YesNo Will contain 5 Minnesota weather zones

PAGE 10 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Comparison of energy use indexes for different benchmark systems  Architecture 2030 EPA Target Finder  Architecture 2030 EPA National averages  B3 Models, 1989, Mn 1993, 2004  DOE 2004  Sensitivity analysis of operational characteristics to compare how Target Finder and the B3 Benchmarking system account for changes in building operation.

PAGE 11 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP All Comparisons

PAGE 12 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP System comparisons All CUT

PAGE 13 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Comparisons 1989 B3 to Target Finder Conclusions The ASHRAE B3 Benchmark model results and the Target Finder results are the best fit of data systems compared in this study.

PAGE 14 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Comparison of 1989 B3 to Architecture 2030 National Averages Conclusions The national average data is national average data; it occasionally resembles Minnesota data but usually does not. It is not a valid method for setting benchmarks for Minnesota buildings.

PAGE 15 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Sensitivity Analysis for Operational Characteristics Conclusions: Changes in operating hours and the conditioned area of the building, have significant impacts on establishing the buildings benchmark. Variations in the parameters studied show impacts up to 25%. We will need a system that accounts for these variations to develop an accurate Benchmark System.

PAGE 16 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Recommended Method for Developing Minnesota Benchmarks  The 2004 code is too stringent, would be difficult to achieve 60%.  Target Finder can not be extended to a larger range of building types – we want a consistent methodology used for all building types.  The National Average EUI’s developed by the Architecture 2030 team are not accurate for running a program in this State.

PAGE 17 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Recommendation : Use the ASHRAE Energy Code  A very efficient analysis method for creating a comprehensive list of building types  It will not require expensive data collection of existing building energy use  The code is a rule based system that can be modeled consistently and accurately for all building types.  The ASHRAE model data is closest to Target Finder results.  The ASHRAE has been the code in place until recently and closely follows the intent of the Architecture 2030 program  Subsequent Code improvements can be easily benchmarked to identify how they alone improve the EUI from the 1989 baseline.

PAGE 18 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Establish Savings Targets from the Benchmark  Architecture 2030 proposes the same % reduction for all building types.  For 2010 it establishes a 60% reduction in consumption  Is this feasible for all building types?

PAGE 19 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Establish Savings Targets from the Benchmark The equivalent percentage savings ranges from 62% for the Small Hotel to 40% savings for the Warehouse building type. This analysis raises the question of using a standard savings percentage for all building types or having it vary based on building type.

PAGE 20 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Analysis of Hospital savings opportunities Conclusion: Hospitals are one example where current technologies and design methods are not available to reduce energy consumption by 60% today. 32 % Savings

PAGE 21 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Development of Building Energy Benchmarks for “Typical” Building Types  We are completing work on simulating Energy Benchmarks for over 30 different building types.  We have researched average building characteristics from the DOE models and hundreds of projects we have archived.  These models utilize average building characteristics by building type for:  Space use type  Space use distribution  Operational schedules for lights, plugs, etc.  Envelope parameters  HVAC parameters

PAGE 22 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Development of Building Energy Benchmarks for “Typical” Building Types  What we have found from our review of the data is there is a large variation in consumption results for “Typical” Building types.  The large variation in consumption results is due to the large variation in each projects unique building program requirements, mainly:  Space use type  Space use distribution – this can be significant  Operational schedules for lights, plugs, etc.  HVAC parameters

PAGE 23 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Sample Distribution of Code Base Office Building Consumption Average kBtu/ SF/ YR

PAGE 24 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Office Building Percentage Difference from Average

PAGE 25 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Dissemination of the Sustainable Buildings 2030 Energy Benchmark System  A web-based calculation tool will be developed to allow project designers to:  Use “default” building characteristic or have the ability to “customize” characteristics based on their unique building program elements.  Editable building characteristics will include:  Building location  Building gross floor area  Building type(s)  Number of floors  Space type, floor area% and hours of use.  Cooling and heating system  Fuel source types for building

PAGE 26 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Dissemination of the Sustainable Buildings 2030 Energy Benchmark System  After results are entered the web-based tool will calculate:  Total Energy Target Standard in kBtu/SF goal based on 2030 savings criteria.  Fuel source end use in kBtu/SF for the Target Standard.  Target Standard CO2 emissions by fuel source.

PAGE 27 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP Summary  We can’t use National Averages  We can’t use Target Finder  We need a lot of space type and operational variables  Modeled data can provide us the flexibility and accuracy we need  Modeled data aligns well with the intent of 2030  ASHRAE 89 is the best code base to use to reflect the intent of 2030  We need to formulate the appropriate range of % savings by building type to be cost-effective.

PAGE 28 Sustainable Buildings 2030 © 2008 THE WEIDT GROUP