[BLDG-SIM] Title 24 Vs ASHRAE 90.1-2004

[Peter Alspach]

LEED has addressed the stringency and 90.1 equivalency of T-24 in both
v2.1 and v2.2 - since the adaptation of Title 24 2001. T-24 2001 is more
stringent than ASHRAE 90.1-1999 and Title 24 2005 is more stringent than
ASHRAE 90.1-2004. LEED has developed an equivalency table to let you
take advantage of that without having to do a T-24 model and a separate
90.1 model. That table is posted on the LEED NC website for download.
You simply take your savings versus T-24 and then use a separate table
to determine your EA-1 points. 

It is important to note that the system mapping in T-24 is more akin to
90.1 2004 Appendix G than the old ECB method. T-24 also has different
factors for modeling occupancy lighting controls and other areas of
simulation interest. It is worth reading the ACM manual to get a
thorough understanding of the differences.

Peter Alspach, P.E.
Associate
Arup
403 Columbia St., Suite 220
Seattle, WA 98104
T: 206-493-2226
C: 206-816-4902
F: 206-749-0665
E: peter.alspach at arup.com


-----Original Message-----
From: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM [mailto:BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM] On Behalf Of Mitchell
Dec
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 6:43 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] Title 24 Vs ASHRAE 90.1-2004

T24 has been approved for the use of both LEED-NC 2.1 (ECBM) and LEED-NC
2.2 (Appendix G PRM). As previously mentioned it could hurt your energy
cost savings if T24 is more stringent than ASHRAE 90.1 for either LEED
version. However, unless you are on the threshold of an additional point
in order to meet certified, silver, gold, or platinum - this is likely
not going to have a significant impact on your LEED rating. 

Therefore, if you find out that LEED Silver (33 points) is the project's
goal, and your project is at 32 points, then the cheapest point to reach
your goal may be to revise the energy model to ASHRAE 90.1. That is
assuming you have already exhausted the 4 LEED ID credits, which can be
obtained rather easily.

 

Mitchell J. Dec
Energy Analyst 

320 SW Washington, Suite 200
Portland, OR 97204-2640
T.  503.227.5280  F. 503.274.7674
Direct: 503.345.6283

Thinking. Inside the building.
http://www.glumac.com/ 


-----Original Message-----
From: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM [mailto:BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM]On Behalf Of Jamy
Bacchus
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 6:20 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] Title 24 Vs ASHRAE 90.1-2004


If it's LEED NC v2.2 then you'll have to use the Appendix G's PRM and
not the ECBM. But we may be straying from the original question...

Jamy

-----Original Message-----
From: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM [mailto:BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM]On Behalf Of Vikram
Sami
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 8:45 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] Title 24 Vs ASHRAE 90.1-2004


Well - if its regarding LEED, it doesnt matter. If 90.1 is more
stringent, then you have to use that for your ECB analysis. If Title 24
is more stringent, why would you use it to compare? You would be
shooting yourself in the foot. I used to mistakenly assume that you had
to use the more stringent standard for comparison for EAc1. Thats not
true. The only time you have to use the more stringent standard is for
the EA prerequisite.

Vikram Sami, LEED AP
Direct Phone 404-253-1466 | Direct Fax 404-253-1366

LORD, AECK & SARGENT ARCHITECTURE
Responsive Design * Technological Expertise * Exceptional Service
www.lordaecksargent.com



-----Original Message-----
From: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM on behalf of Vaibhav Potnis
Sent: Mon 9/25/2006 18:46
To: BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] Title 24 Vs ASHRAE 90.1-2004

Raman,

I am assuming you are asking wrt LEED 2.2.

USGBC has accpeted T-24-2005 to be as stringent as ASHRAE 90.1-2004.

Vaibhav Potnis
Green Building Services, Inc.

www.greenbuildingservices.com



________________________________

From: "Ramana Koti" <ramana.koti at gmail.com>
Reply-To: ramana.koti at gmail.com
To: <BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM>
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] Title 24 Vs ASHRAE 90.1-2004
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 11:10:03 -0500

Dear all,

With regards to energy efficiency standard  for an office building in
California, as of today, how does Title 24 compare with ASHRAE
90.1-2004?
Any commonly accepted opinion on relative stringency?

Thanks,

Ramana Koti, Sustainable Building Analyst LEED AP

ELEMENTS | a division of berkebile nelson immenschuh mcdowell architects
106 W. 14th Street Suite 200
Kansas City, Missouri 64105

p 816.783.1635 f 816.783.1501
www.bnim.com| elements.bnim.com <http://elements.bnim.com/>

Mobile Phone: 480.326.9275




======================================================
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



==================
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


======================================================
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


==================
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
____________________________________________________________
Electronic mail messages entering and leaving Arup  business
systems are scanned for acceptability of content and viruses

===========================
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