[BLDG-SIM] ASHRAE 90.1 Energy Cost Budget Method

Zoeteman, Mark R. mrzoeteman at FTCH.com
Mon Aug 30 05:07:22 PDT 2004


The purpose of ECBM is allow trade-offs like you describe.  The lighting
may exceed prescriptive requirements (like in your case), but other
building components would need to have better performance to bring the
proposed building into compliance.  You would need to demonstrate
compliance using a building energy simulation program described in
section 11 of ASHRAE 90.1.
Mark Zoeteman, P.E.
FTC&H, Inc. 
(616) 464-3739 
mrzoeteman at ftch.com 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: Ketterer, Al [mailto:Al.Ketterer at benham.com] 
	Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 9:27 AM
	To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
	Subject: [BLDG-SIM] ASHRAE 90.1 Energy Cost Budget Method
	
	
	Does anyone have any experience with using ASHRAE 90.1-2001 and
proving compliance through the Energy Cost Budget Method? There's a
statement in Section 11.3.8 that says lighting power in the proposed
design shall be determined in accordance with section 9.3. Section 9.3
gives the prescriptive path for determining lighting power allowance by
both the building area method or the space by space method.
	 
	My question comes in, that for the building I am trying to prove
compliance for, the actual lighting exceeds the lighting allowance,
which for this building is 1.3 w/sf. The actual lighting is on the order
of 2 to 2.25 w/sf. If I prove that the proposed building even with these
higher lighting levels has a lower design energy cost than the budget
building is the proposed building in compliance with ASHRAE 90.1? I take
this to be a trade off, but the wording in section 11.3.8 confuses the
issue. In the User's Manual for ASHRAE 90.1 under documentation
compliance, it says that a written description of those energy features
that either exceed the minimal requirements or that are less than the
requirements must be documented. This shows the plan checker which items
are involved in the trade-offs.
	 

	Albert E. Ketterer, PE
	Senior Mechanical Engineer and Mechanical Discipline Manager

	The Benham Companies
	3668 S. Geyer Rd.
	St. Louis, MO 63127-1243

	314/821-7017 ext. 109 voice
	314/315-8509 direct
	314/821-8499 fax
	Al.Ketterer at Benham.com  email 

	 
	
	==================
	You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
	to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
	from this mailing list send a blank message to 
	BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM

	This E-mail and any attached files are confidential, and may be
copyright protected. If you are not the addressee, any dissemination of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
message in error, please contact the sender immediately and
delete/destroy all information received.
	



===========================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20040830/6592630a/attachment.htm>


More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list