[Bldg-sim] Spam:Re: EPact 2005 tax savings
Carol Gardner
gems at spiritone.com
Thu Feb 26 09:12:20 PST 2009
Hi Duke,
It has to come from the developer. I am actually trying to get this
started by getting the effort funded and by working with the developers.
I have their cooperation so far so I hope it's just a matter of time.
Cheers,
Carol Gardner
Duke Graham wrote:
>
> Probably a silly question, but can one of US submit eQuest for approval?
>
> Does it have to come from the developers?
>
> Just thinking.
>
> *From:* bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Sam Mason
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 26, 2009 7:46 AM
> *To:* James Hess; Crawley, Drury; Addison Marlin; Hirsch J. James
> *Cc:* EFranconi at archenergy.com; BLDG-SIM at lists.onebuilding.org; Jay
> Keazer; Brantley Caleb; DGoldstein at nrdc.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Bldg-sim] Spam:Re: EPact 2005 tax savings
>
> Thanks everyone for the interesting discussion. I wanted to get to the
> bottom of the actual software requirements, so I dug around on the IRS
> website and found the following info
> (http://www.irs.gov/irb/2008-14_IRB/ar12.html#d0e4028). >From what I
> can tell, equest meets all of the requirements below. It would seem as
> Drury said no one has submitted the documentation to the DOE for
> approval. This has huge implications for anybody involved in this
> business.
>
> .01 /In General/. The Department of Energy creates and maintains a
> public list of software that may be used to calculate energy and power
> consumption and costs for purposes of providing a certification under
> section 4 of Notice 2006-52. This public list appears at
> /http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/tax_incentives.html/. Soft-
> ware will be included on the list if the software developer submits
> the following information to the Department of Energy:
>
> (1) The name, address, and (if applicable) web site of the software
> developer;
>
> (2) The name, email address, and telephone number of the person to
> contact for further information regarding the software;
>
> (3) The name, version, or other identifier of the software as it will
> appear on the list;
>
> (4) All test results, input files, output files, weather data, modeler
> reports, and the executable version of the software with which the
> tests were conducted; and
>
> (5) A declaration by the developer of the software made under
> penalties of perjury and containing all of the following information:
>
> (a) A statement that the software has been tested according to the
> American National Standards Institute/American Society of Heating,
> Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ANSI/ASHRAE) Standard
> 140-2007 Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy
> Analysis Computer Programs.
>
> (b) A statement that the software can model explicitly—
>
> (i) 8,760 hours per year;
>
> (ii) Calculation methodologies for the building components being modeled;
>
> (iii) 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;
>
> (iv) Thermal mass effects;
>
> (v) Ten or more thermal zones;
>
> (vi) Part-load performance curves for mechanical equipment;
>
> (vii) Capacity and efficiency correction curves for mechanical heating
> and cooling equipment; and
>
> (viii) Air-side and water-side economizers with integrated control.
>
> (c) A statement that the software can explicitly model each of the
> following HVAC systems listed in Appendix G of Standard 90.1-2004:
>
> (i) Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner (PTAC) (air source), single-zone
> package (through the wall), multi-zone hydronic loop, air-to-air DX
> coil cooling, central boiler, hot water coil.
>
> (ii) Packaged Terminal Heat Pump (PTHP) (air source), single-zone
> package (through the wall), air-to-air DX coil heat/cool.
>
> (iii) Packaged Single Zone Air Conditioner (PSZ-AC), single-zone air,
> air-to-air DX coil cool, gas coil, constant-speed fan.
>
> (iv) Packaged Single Zone Heat Pump (PSZ-HP), single-zone air,
> air-to-air DX coil cool/heat, constant-speed fan.
>
> (v) Packaged Variable-Air-Volume (PVAV) with reheat, multi-zone air;
> multi-zone hydronic loop, air-to-air DX coil, VAV fan, boiler, hot
> water VAV terminal boxes.
>
> (vi) Packaged Variable-Air-Volume with parallel fan powered boxes
> (PVAV with PFP boxes), multi-zone air, DX coil, VAV fan, fan-powered
> induction boxes, electric reheat.
>
> (vii) Variable-Air-Volume (VAV) with reheat, multi-zone air,
> multi-zone hydronic loop, air-handling unit, chilled water coil, hot
> water coil, VAV fan, chiller, boiler, hot water VAV boxes.
>
> (viii) Variable-Air-Volume with parallel fan powered boxes (VAV with
> PFP boxes), multi-zone air, air-handling unit, chilled water coil, hot
> water coil, VAV fan, chiller, fan-powered induction boxes, electric
> reheat.
>
> (d) A statement that the software can—
>
> (i) Either directly determine energy and power costs or produce hourly
> reports of energy use by energy source suitable for determining energy
> and power costs separately; and
>
> (ii) Design load calculations to determine required HVAC equipment
> capacities and air and water flow rates.
>
> (e) A statement describing which, if any, of the following the
> software can explicitly model:
>
> (i) Natural ventilation.
>
> (ii) Mixed mode (natural and mechanical) ventilation.
>
> (iii) Earth tempering of outdoor air.
>
> (iv) Displacement ventilation.
>
> (v) Evaporative cooling.
>
> (vi) Water use by occupants for cooking, cleaning or other domestic uses.
>
> (vii) Water use by heating, cooling, or other equipment, or for
> on-site landscaping.
>
> (viii) Automatic interior or exterior lighting controls (such as
> occupancy, photocells, or time clocks).
>
> (viii) Daylighting (sidelighting, skylights, or tubular daylight
> devices).
>
> (ix) Improved fan system efficiency through static pressure reset.
>
> (x) Radiant heating or cooling (low or high temperature).
>
> (xi) Multiple or variable speed control for fans, cooling equipment,
> or cooling towers.
>
> (xii) On-site energy systems (such as combined heat and power systems,
> fuel cells, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, or wind).
>
> --
> Sam Mason
> Atelier Ten
> sam.mason at atelierten.com
>
> *From:* bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *James Hess
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:42 AM
> *To:* Crawley, Drury; Addison Marlin; Hirsch J. James
> *Cc:* EFranconi at archenergy.com; DGoldstein at nrdc.org; Brantley Caleb;
> Jay Keazer; BLDG-SIM at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Bldg-sim] Spam:Re: EPact 2005 tax savings
>
> This is a good discussion.
>
> Just a question, if eQuest is DOE 2.1E (which has been accepted) but
> with bug fixes and enhancements, why wouldn't it already be accepted,
> or acceptable? What documentation needs to be submitted? I'm not
> understanding this discussion I guess. Are we not splitting hairs?
>
> Another area I don't understand is why anybody is still using DOE2.1E,
> if DOE2.2 corrected many known errors present in DOE2.1E???
>
> Maybe part of the reason eQuest is not being
> submitted/approved/upgraded is lack of funding. I have never
> understood why the eQuest program is strictly tied to receiving
> funding only from the California energy commission.
>
> Like Ellen said, eQuest is one of the most widely used energy analysis
> programs in the US. We use it because it works for the production
> environment we work in (which does not allow for runtimes of hours).
> It's fast, very capable, accurate, & enables us to generate acceptable
> results for 99% of our projects while staying within our cost budgets.
> Whatever we can't do in eQuest, we can generally do with Excel
> supplementing.
>
> That said, the program could use some upgrades. I'm guessing that
> there are users out here like myself that would gladly pay a general
> users fee if it meant getting upgrades to the program. Upgrades that
> are relevant to the user base and delivered in a more timely fashion.
> I'm saying I don't understand why the funding has to come only from
> California Energy Cx. Not saying that the CEC funding isn't
> appreciated, but that alternative funding by the general users at
> large could allow more features to be integrated into the program.
> Currently, the features that get upgraded into the program are
> determined by the CEC and their limited funding. This is why important
> features such as exhaust air energy recovery for dedicated outdoor air
> systems are missing.
>
> Appreciate any follow up thoughts by anybody.
>
> Regards,
>
> James Hess
>
> TME
>
> Little Rock, AR
>
> Sent from James' iPod
>
>
> On Feb 25, 2009, at 10:48 PM, "Crawley, Drury"
> <Drury.Crawley at ee.doe.gov <mailto:Drury.Crawley at ee.doe.gov>> wrote:
>
> Any tool that has the required documentation is reviewed promptly
> by DOE and the results posted if the tool meets the qualification
> requirements. No documentation for eQuest has been submitted to
> DOE to date.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From*: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> <mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org>
> *To*: Xiaobing Liu ; Joe Huang
> *Cc*: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> <mailto:bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org> ; David Goldstein
> *Sent*: Wed Feb 25 19:25:31 2009
> *Subject*: Re: [Bldg-sim] EPact 2005 tax savings
>
> 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 <mailto: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>
> > [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
> <mailto: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>
> > [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
> <mailto: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>
> <mailto:chris at mullinaxsolutions.com>
> >
> > www.mullinaxsolutions.com <http://www.mullinaxsolutions.com>
> <http://www.mullinaxsolutions.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bldg-sim mailing list
> > http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to
> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
> <mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to
> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
> <mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to
> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
> <mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.3/1971 - Release Date: 02/25/09 06:40:00
>
>
More information about the Bldg-sim
mailing list