Energy Analysis

Energy Analysis – Quantifying Impacts

Quantifying Impacts!

Green Roundtable
December 07 Roundtable

© Integrated Environmental Solutions Ltd. 2007

IES – a company with multiple skillsets
hybrid
thermal ventilation

mechanical
CFD

electrical Sustainability
evacuation
Consulting on
projects
lighting costs internationally
value
x
x
solar compliance
daylighting
Integrated Building
Performance Analysis
<Virtual Environment>


Integrated Analysis Platform - The <Virtual Environment>:

hybrid
thermal ventilation

mechanical
CFD

electrical
evacuation

costs
lighting
value

xx

solar compliance

daylighting


Key Questions

1 How do you define Energy Modeling?

2 What do you think Energy Modeling
should tell you?

3 At what stage does Energy Modeling
take place?


What is Green Buckshot?
The long answer – a set of approaches to work within an environment of:
Mis-Information Perception Contractual Relationships ”new math” calculations the building code
doesn’t allow it trust me, I’ve done this before green costs more if we open the windows it will
reek havoc on the controls and it will use more energy the building code doesn’t allow you to use
water for that use the “I don’t want to do it, so it will cost you” estimate the rolling of the eyes, while
saying we already do all that we did the analysis on another project and it doesn’t work the pay
back is over 50 years the cost of energy isn’t going to go up that much you don’t know what you
are talking about, I been doing this for over xx years I was doing this before you were born the
owner would not be happy if we did the calculations that way we have to assume each room is at full
occupancy for load sizing you are not allowed to assume the inclusion of any shading on the
calculations it was a disaster on this project so it shouldn’t be considered for this one even if that
was included it does not lower the equipment size to the next level down, so you might as well keep it
included in the calculations we don’t know how much energy the building uses overall if we do that
we will get call backs from the owner if we are asked to do that we will not stamp the drawings you
can not expand the temperature set points the green strategy costs at least 20% more if we have to
do all that paperwork it will be too expensive why should we have to document it when we already do
all of that the building code does not allow us to change our calculations the client will not want
that .that is not part of the contract that will use more energy those systems breakdown that
strategy doesn’t align with the aesthetic character we can’t do that until the design settles down if
we do that the owner will be calling us every week the lead times are too long that won’t get us a
LEED credit my subs will not work with that we have a set group of people who we purchase
products from we will have to put someone on that full time and new exciting ones everyday

The shorter answer - Using a range of strategies constructively to get project team members
and owners to engage and assist raising the performance bar


What is Green Buckshot?
The long answer – a set of approaches to work within an environment of:
Mis-Information Perception Contractual Relationships ”new math” calculations the building
code doesn’t allow it trust me, I’ve done this before green costs more if we open the windows it
will reek havoc on the controls and it will use more energy the building code doesn’t allow you to use
water for that use the “I don’t want to do it, so it will cost you” estimate the rolling of the eyes, while
saying we already do all that we did the analysis on another project and it doesn’t work the pay
back is over 50 years the cost of energy isn’t going to go up that much you don’t know what you
are talking about, I been doing this for over xx years I was doing this before you were born the
owner would not be happy if we did the calculations that way we have to assume each room is at
full occupancy for load sizing you are not allowed to assume the inclusion of any shading on the
calculations it was a disaster on this project so it shouldn’t be considered for this one even if that
was included it does not lower the equipment size to the next level down, so you might as well
keep it included in the calculations we don’t know how much energy the building uses overall if
we do that we will get call backs from the owner if we are asked to do that we will not stamp the
drawings you can not expand the temperature set points the green strategy costs at least 20%
more if we have to do all that paperwork it will be too expensive why should we have to document it
when we already do all of that the building code does not allow us to change our calculations
the client will not want that .that is not part of the contract that will use more energy those
systems breakdown that strategy doesn’t align with the aesthetic character we can’t do that until
the design settles down if we do that the owner will be calling us every week the lead times are too
long that won’t get us a LEED credit my subs will not work with that we have a set group of
people who we purchase products from we will have to put someone on that full time and new
exciting ones everyday
The shorter answer - Using a range of strategies constructively to get project team members
and owners to engage and assist raising the performance bar


beyond

Regenerative

Net Generating
0 sustainable
Zero Carbon Footprint

Zero Energy

Zero Waste Water discharge

Zero Storm water discharge

Striving towards

Integrated Design Process (IDP)

MINDSET
How we think, the assumptions we make, our perceptions of
role and expectations of interaction

PROCESS
Collaborative decision making, blurring of roles and clarity of
scope

TOOLS
Early analysis, life cycle context, material specifications, etc.


Recommended Approach
Building Carbon Emissions

Zero CO2
Emissions

Lean Green Clean
Using good design principals Applying Low & Carbon Using Renewable
with current technology Neutral Technologies Technologies


Renewables


Integrated Design Process Standard – 2 yr effort and counting

Whole System Integrative Design Process (WSIP)
Materials
Water / Habitat
Integrative Design Process All Hands Energy
Meetings Indoor Envir Qlty
$: budget

M
W/H
E
IEQ
$

Prelim SD DD CD B&N Constr & Maint
VE

Linear Design Process

Prelim SD DD CD B&N B&N B&N Constr.

VE VE VE

ANSI/MTS 1.0 WSIP Guide-2007

Integrated Design Process Standard – 2 yr effort and counting

Chair of the WS-IDP Committee - Bill Reed
Vice Chair - John Boecker
Sub-Committee Chairs
Thomas Taylor
Doug Pierce
Garrick Maine
Rex Loker
Committee Members
Helen Kessler
Gail Borthwick
Sean Culman
Barbra Batshalom
Kevin Settlemyre
Joel Freehling
Marcus Sheffer
Muscoe Martin
Brian Toevs
Jen Zurick
Thomas Mozina
Tom Keiter'
John Albrecht
John Montgomery
Rick Prohov
Kathy Wardle
Dave Dimond
Michael Italiano
Sherrie Gruder
Mandy Wong
Vuk Vujovic
Mitchell Swann ANSI/MTS 1.0 WSIP Guide-2007

Materials
M Water / Habitat
W/H
All Hands Energy
E Meetings Indoor Envir Qlty
IEQ
$

VE

ASHRAE
90.1-2004
Appendix G

Units for Comparison Comparing Baseline
1) kBtu/sf/yr Building & Proposed
2) tCO2 (tons of carbon dioxide) Design
Units = $

Early Stage - Benchmark

Target Finder

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey
(CBECS)

a national sample survey that collects information on the
stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related
building characteristics, and their energy consumption and
expenditures.

Benchmark #1

Early Stage - Benchmark

Target Finder (in 2008)

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey
(CBECS)

a national sample survey that collects information on the
stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related
building characteristics, and their energy consumption and
expenditures.

Benchmark #1

Sustain
Analyzing Carbon: The benchmark & targets I.Q.

Source: May 4, 2007 Press Release - The 2030 Challenge Benchmark Set
Building Design Leaders Unite on Energy Reduction Targets

The Strategic Partners:
The Architecture 2030 Challenge
has aligned the commitment of
some very influential organizations
and firms to begin the process of
implementing the Carbon
Reduction Challenge and
achieving the targets!

Benchmark Firms &
IES is honored to be participating
Organ. in this effort to assist project teams
quantify impacts!
50%
Now! The following series outlines these
targets with some of our own
included!

Main Menu

Sustain
Analyzing Carbon: The benchmark & targets I.Q.

Source: May 4, 2007 Press Release - The 2030 Challenge Benchmark Set
Building Design Leaders Unite on Energy Reduction Targets

70%
2015

Benchmark Firms &
90%
2025
Organ.
80%
2020
50%
Now! 60% Carbon
2010
Neutral
2030
(truly sustainable)

+10%
2035

Main Menu

What does kbtu/sf/yr mean?

EBN: - Dec.07 Back page primer:
kBtu = 1,000 btu (British Thermal Units) If all this feels intimidating,
remember that (if you grew up in
1 Btu = 0.293 kiloWatt hours (kWh) the U.S.) you’ve managed to
master the entirely arbitrary
1 kilowatt hour = A measure of your electricity consumption. One kilowatt system of inches, feet, and yards.
hour is equivalent to 1,000 watt hours or running a 100 Watt light bulb for These energy metrics are much
10 hours simpler.
44.7 kbtu/sf/yr
0.293 cnv 13.10 kwh/sf/yr
1000 cnv 13,097 Wh/sf/yr
lightbulb 60 W 219 hrs/sf/yr
24 hrs 9.125 days/sf/yr

1 sq.ft

The 60 Watt light bulb would be on
for 219 hrs


Benchmark #1: Energy Snapshot

Village Center - Ann Arbor
source: Energy Star Target Finder
electricity 25%
natural gas 75%

Target Top 10%
Energy Performance Rating (1-100) 50 66 75 90
Energy Reduction (%) 0% 20% 30% 53%
Source Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq. Ft./yr) 190.2 154.1 134.0 89.3
Site Energy Use Intensity (kBtu/Sq. Ft./yr) 117.4 95.1 82.7 55.1
Total Annual Source Energy (kBtu) 114,131,024 92,441,168 80,417,106 53,565,228
Total Annual Site Energy (kBtu) 70,440,379 57,053,645 49,632,530 33,059,854
Total Annual Energy Cost ($) $791,045 $640,712 $557,373 $371,262
Pollution Emissions
CO2 Emissions (1000 lbs/year) 7,329.90 5,937.00 5,164.70 3,440.20
CO2 Emissions Reduction (%) 0% 19% 30% 53%
yr 1 $ energy savings $150,333 $233,672 $419,783

electricity $197,761 $160,178 $139,343 $92,816
natural gas $593,284 $480,534 $418,030 $278,447


The playing field

Potential Energy Savings ($)
$800,000

$700,000

$600,000

$500,000

20%
$400,000
30%
$300,000 >50%

$200,000

$100,000

$-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Potential Energy $ Savings
6% Energy Escalation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
20% $ 150,400 $ 159,500 $ 169,100 $ 179,300 $ 190,100 $ 201,600 $ 213,700 $ 226,600 $ 240,200 $ 254,700
cumulative $ 309,900 $ 479,000 $ 658,300 $ 848,400 $ 1,050,000 $ 1,263,700 $1,490,300 $1,730,500 $1,985,200
30% $ 233,700 $ 247,800 $ 262,700 $ 278,500 $ 295,300 $ 313,100 $ 331,900 $ 351,900 $ 373,100 $ 395,500
cumulative $ 481,500 $ 744,200 $ 1,022,700 $ 1,318,000 $ 1,631,100 $ 1,963,000 $2,314,900 $2,688,000 $3,083,500
>50% $ 419,800 $ 445,000 $ 471,700 $ 500,100 $ 530,200 $ 562,100 $ 595,900 $ 631,700 $ 669,700 $ 709,900
cumulative $ 864,800 $ 1,336,500 $ 1,836,600 $ 2,366,800 $ 2,928,900 $ 3,524,800 $4,156,500 $4,826,200 $5,536,100


Early Stage Options
Materials
M Water / Habitat
W/H
All Hands Energy
E Meetings Indoor Envir Qlty
IEQ
$

VE

the full
1 <VE>/Revit Link 2 Toolkits 3 <Virtual Environment>

Leveraging Information High Value The ability to answer
in new ways information quickly the tough questions


It’s getting easier to quantify...

<VE> Sustainability Toolkit enables designers to
perform common sustainable design analysis with
a single button click
Heating and Cooling Loads Calculation:
enables architects to establish the effect of building
on peak energy usage
allow mechanical engineers to establish chiller &
boiler size

Dynamic thermal simulation:
Establish annual energy & carbon dioxide usage,
peak internal climatic conditions, internal thermal
comfort conditions

Daylighting assessment:
Establish daylight illuminance levels throughout the
building for BREEAM, BB87/101, EcoHomes.

Sun-View movies:
The sun never sees a shadow, analyse winter,
summer and transitional solar penetration

LEED daylighting credit report:
Produce a LEED NC 2.2 daylighting credit 8.1 report
analysing all regularly habited rooms within the
building.

1 The <Virtual Environment>: Design Process

Building design process

Massing: Shape & Master Planning Concept Design Detailed Design Completion
Form

Revit Model <VE> Model
Building Information Modeling Performance Analysis


The <VE>: Daylight quantified


Massing: Master Concept Detailed Completion
Shape & Planning Design Design
Form

Addresses :
• What is the daylight availability based on the facade design?


The <Virtual Environment>: Value Scenarios

Building design process Establish which building shape & form,
construction or glazing type is the optimum
value for your clients
Form

Base : 50% Glazing 3: Bronze 50% Glazing

1: 20% Glazing 4: 50% Glazing

2: 80% Glazing 5: 50% Glazing


The <VE>: Daylight & Glare


Form

• What is the light distribution in the space
based on fenestration and material reflectance?
• How much glare is present that could impact
the retail experience?
• Are there intense periods of light that could
impact the retail experience


The <VE>: Comfort quantified


Form

- How does the HVAC system and
distribution method impact thermal
Comfort predictions
comfort?

Peak daily cooling loads
Daily CO2 concentrations


The <Virtual Environment>: Comfort


Form

- How does the space and system design
influence indoor air quality (calculation and
graphic representation)?

Mean age of air

Temperature Comfort

The <VE>: Energy usage


Form

- What is the overall energy consumption and
cost impact at different stages


OPW Headquarters, Trim, Ireland matrix

Dynamic Thermal Analysis
Summary:
• Comprehensive
simulation study
• Simulation used
throughout the design
process
• Thermal, lighting,
External Site Analysis Internal CFD airflow and energy
analysis
• Greater than
50% reduction
in carbon
production
• Superior
Lighting Analysis
IDM comfort
Internal CFD conditions
achieved

For and on behalf of:

Dynamic Thermal
Modelling Energy Analysis

Solar Analysis

LEED: Energy Modeling Standard

Optimize Energy Performance


LEED: Simulation Program Requirements

G2.2 Simulation Program. The simulation program shall be
a computer-based program and shall include calculation
methodologies for the building components being modeled.

G2.2.1 The simulation program shall have the ability to
explicitly model:
(a) 8,760 hours per year;
(b) hourly variations in occupancy, lighting power,
miscellaneous equipment power, thermostat setpoints, and
HVAC system operation, defined separately for each day of
the week and holidays;
(c) thermal mass effects;
(d) ten or more thermal zones;
(e) part-load performance curves for mechanical equipment;
(f) capacity and efficiency correction curves for mechanical
heating and cooling equipment;
(g) air-side economizers with integrated control;
(h) baseline building design characteristics specified in G3.

G2.2.3 The simulation program shall be capable of
performing design load calculations to determine required
HVAC equipment capacities


So you want standards

If doing a project in Massachusetts – this scenario is real:

ASHRAE 90.1-1999 - -
Building Code Compliance (0-1 sim run min.)

ASHRAE 90.1-2001 - -
Utility Rebates (2 sim runs. min.)

ASHRAE 90.1-2004 - -
LEED Compliance (5 sim runs min.)


Design Model
Baseline Model


Early Stage Analysis – Student Examples


Energy Analysis

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Energy Analysis

More from Sustainable Performance Institute

Recently uploaded

Energy Analysis