[Bldg-sim] Percent Energy Savings

[Xavier Garcia Casals]

Indeed, varaible reference comparison methodologies (each building is 
compared with a different reference and judged by its relative 
performace compared with this variable reference) are far from an 
objectives oriented methodology, and can easily introduce distorsions 
when applied (like better qualifying solutions consuming more energy 
than other solutions with worse qualification). They are 'easy' to 
implement but not that useful to achieve quantified objectives in 
reducing building energy consumption. On the other hand, fixed reference 
comparison methodologies (where the building performance is compared 
with an absolute indicator like kWh/m2-y or emissions) are a bit more 
hard to implement since an apropriate scale for the abolute indicator 
has to be choosen to properly represent each use cathegory of the 
current building stock, but then ara completly oriented to objectives. 
In the US you already have mechanisms to stablish the apprpriate scales 
for the absolute indicator (e.i. Energy Star), and therefore it seems a 
pity that Std. 90.1 and LEED rely on variable reference comparison 
methodologies.

En/na Varkie C Thomas ha escrit:
> I received a few responses to this message from outside the USA sent 
> directly to me.  Below is the message again with some additional 
> points in red.  The sections highlighted in yellow is from one of the 
> responses
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
> [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Varkie 
> C Thomas
> *Sent:* 2009-03-03 18:26
> *To:* bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* [Bldg-sim] Percent Energy Savings
>
>  
>
> ASHRAE Std90 for the baseline is already stringent and specifies the 
> commonly used systems & plants based on building type and size.  Based 
> on the CCGT building, high percentage energy savings for LEED 
> certification can be achieved with low-rise buildings with a high 
> exposure to floor surface areas to locate PV panels, high but 
> efficient glass to wall area for day-lighting, the use of GSHP (which 
> requires a large site area which may not be available in city blocks), 
> and low common energy consuming systems in baseline and proposed which 
> increases “percentage” energy savings. 
>
>  
>
> A school building is low-rise, is low in process loads (increases % 
> savings) and is high in occupancy ventilation which allows for 
> air-to-air heat recovery. It operates only during the day increasing 
> the impact of day-lighting. It is closed in summer, reducing the 
> annual cooling load and increases the impact of solar heating during 
> the rest of the year in cold climates.  So it is possible to achieve 
> zero energy usage. 
>
>  
>
> The choices are limited in the case of inner city high-rise 
> buildings.  Today’s high-rise office building design tries to maximize 
> the glass percentage which increases the impact of day-lighting.  The 
> glass could have PV properties with a very small overall efficiency of 
> converting light to 110V electricity.  The ASHRAE Std90 baseline for 
> Systems and Plants for such a building is considered normal design.  
> UFAD and other options are not typical.  The proposed envelope has to 
> offset the 40% Window-Wall-Ratio specified by ASHRAE.  If the office 
> building envelope is used for a hospital or hotel, which operate 8760 
> hours/year, then the percent energy savings will go down. 
>
>  
>
> High percent energy savings does not therefore necessarily mean a 
> better or optimized designed building in terms of the client’s 
> interests.  Percent energy savings should therefore not be the 
> criteria for energy efficient building design.  It should be based on 
> Energy Conservation Measures (ECM) used for the given building that 
> are more energy efficient compared to ASHRAE Std90 for the given 
> building type and size which usually results in increased first costs. 
> The ECMs are going to be different for different types of buildings in 
> different locations.  If the ECM used is inappropriate, then the 
> client pays a price for the high percent energy savings.
>
>  
>
> In my opinion the way to express energy efficiency would be energy per 
> unit area.  Occupancy per unit area has to be defined for different 
> types of buildings (office, hotel, retail, hospital, etc.) and energy 
> efficiency should also take into account location based on HDD & CDD.  
> Energy per Person will account for overall energy efficiency of 
> buildings & transportation when designing sustainable townships.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>   

-- 

* *

*Xavier García Casals*

 

Tel: (+34) 91 843 19 85

Móvil: 660 22 94 45

xgcasals at telefonica.net <mailto:xgcasals at telefonica.net>

 

* *

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090304/5583ab34/attachment-0002.htm>