[Bldg-sim] EPact 2005 tax savings

[Randy Wilkinson]

Keep in mind:
  1) those others are profitable software, eQuest is free. 
  2) EPACT05 was originally a 2 year program...and they didn't even 
figure out how to regulate the modeling until it was half over.  Only 
recently did it start to make sense to have it approved.

I asked the eQuest big cheese back in October...here was his reply:


We are looking into re-doing (updating) the last submission package 
(which was done
with the previous version of ASHRAE 140 but not submitted before the std 
was updated
this not able to be actually submitted)
 
---
Jeff Hirsch
James J. Hirsch & Associates


    ----- Original Message -----
    *From:* Randy Wilkinson <mailto:randyw at lseng.com>
    *To:* Jeff.Hirsch at DOE2.com <mailto:Jeff.Hirsch at DOE2.com>
    *Sent:* Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:00 AM
    *Subject:* GBS uses DOE 2.2-44e4 and is EPACT approved...why not eQuest?

    Hi Jeff,

    Is there something we can do to help get it approved?  Looks like we
    have another 5 years of EPACT tax deductions to figure out.

    Randy
    -- 
    Randall C. Wilkinson , P.E., C.E.M., LEED A.P., Mechanical Engineer
    v:509.747.2179  f:509.747.2186  i:www.lseng.com <http://www.lseng.com>
    L&S  Engineering Associates, Inc.
    'High Performance Design'




Ellen Franconi wrote:
> Joe, thanks for shedding some light on the acceptance criteria and how 
> it compares to other approaches.
>  
> It is truly a shame that eQUEST has not been approved yet. I do not 
> know what the hold up is but I believe the program was submitted years 
> ago to DOE for acceptance. VisualDOE was accepted a couple of months 
> after its application was submitted. It makes you wonder what DOE 2.2 
> is missing that DOE 2.1E has. Better submittal documentation?
>  
> eQUEST is probably the most widely used program for performing 
> simulation analysis in the U.S. With our current administration's 
> initiative to promote an energy-efficient economy and have Federal 
> Buildings achieve 30% better performance than 90.1-2004, it is 
> inconsistent that this program is not fast-tracked for acceptance. 
> With construction costs climbing dramatically, these tax incentives 
> could go a long way to help achieve what they were designed for - 
> promoting energy efficient buildings in the U.S.
>  
> If anyone on BLDG-SIM can provide insights into why eQUEST has not 
> been accepted, please share this with the rest of us. And if no 
> explanation can be provided, perhaps we can use our BLDG-SIM critical 
> mass to encourage DOE and/or the software developers to push this 
> through the acceptance process.
>  
> Ellen
>  
>  
> Ellen Franconi, Ph.D., LEED AP
> Energy Analysis Group Manager
> Architectural Energy Corporation
> 2540 Frontier Avenue
> Boulder, CO 80301
> tel. 303-444-4149
> fax 303-444-4303
> efranconi at archenergy.com <mailto:efranconi at archenergy.com>
> http://www.archenergy.com/
>
>
> >>> Joe Huang <joe at drawbdl.com> 02/25/09 2:17 PM >>>
> I frankly don't understand the criteria of acceptance for software
> approval.  It seems to accept any program that's self-described as
> capable of dynamic simulations with time-varying inputs and outputs, and
> has gone through the ASHRAE/ANSI Standard 140 comparisons. But Standard
> 140 is just a cross-program comparison for very simplified cases, sort
> of digital hot-box experiments, if you will.  Does this mean that all
> simulations done with these programs are valid and credible ?  Any DOE-2
> simulation ? Any EnergyPlus simulation ? Of course not.  It's all in the
> inputs, and if the inputs or modeling are faulty, the results could be
> all over the map.   If we compare this criteria of acceptance to
> California's Title-24 Certification of compliance programs, the
> approaches are almost completely opposite.  Here, the criteria are
> whether the programs have the right fundamentals or "intentions" ;
> there, the criteria are whether the programs give the right results. 
> I'm afraid we're leaving the barn door open for a lot of questionable
> claims backed up by the use (or abuse) of supposedly approved software.
>
> Joe Huang
>
>
>
> Xiaobing Liu wrote:
> > As I remember, Green Building Studio (GBS) is on the list. Since GBS
> > runs eQUEST (and other software?) behind the screen, can the tax
> > credits be granted if the building performance simulation is conducted
> > by eQUEST through GBS. I'm a bit confused here. Can anyone shed light
> > on this issue?
> > 
> > Xiaobing
> >
> >     -----Original Message-----
> >     *From:* bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> >     [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org]*On Behalf Of
> >     *David S Eldridge
> >     *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:22 PM
> >     *To:* bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> >     *Subject:* Re: [Bldg-sim] EPact 2005 tax savings
> >
> >     It is currently not submitted for approval.
> >
> >     
> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> >
> >     
> >
> >     David Eldridge, PE
> >
> >     LEED® AP
> >
> >
> >     *Grumman/Butkus Associates* | 820 Davis Street, STE 300 |
> >     Evanston, IL 60201 | Ph: (847) 328-3555, ext 224 | Fax: (847) 
> 328-4550
> >
> >     
> >
> >     Energy Consultants and Design Engineers
> >     
> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> >
> >     
> >
> >     
> >
> >     
> >
> >     *From:* bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> >     [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of
> >     *Chris Mullinax
> >     *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:26 PM
> >     *To:* bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> >     *Subject:* [Bldg-sim] EPact 2005 tax savings
> >
> >     
> >
> >     
> >
> >     http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/qualified_software.html
> >
> >     
> >
> >     Epact 2005 tax credits were extended to 2013 in the recent
> >     “Stimulus Package.”
> >
> >     
> >
> >     I’m looking at a page on the DOE web site that lists approved
> >     software used obtain Epact 2005 tax credits, and I notice eQuest
> >     is not specifically listed. DOE-2.1 is listed however. Does anyone
> >     know if eQuest will be acceptable for EPact 2005 simulations?
> >
> >     
> >
> >     The link to the list is given above.
> >
> >     Any help is appreciated.
> >
> >     
> >
> >     Thanks,
> >
> >     Chris Mullinax, P.E. LEED AP
> >
> >     
> >
> >     pn: 770-387-1334
> >
> >     fx:  770-387-1383
> >
> >     chris at mullinaxsolutions.com <mailto:chris at mullinaxsolutions.com>
> >
> >     www.mullinaxsolutions.com <http://www.mullinaxsolutions.com>
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090225/ba938a7c/attachment-0002.htm>