[Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost
Julia Beabout
juliabeabout at yahoo.com
Fri May 13 07:21:39 PDT 2011
Omar,
This is cracking me up. I don't think I've ever seen this much traffic on one
issue! LOL.
Regarding the manhours for a LEED model - my opinion is that the amount of time
has much more to do with the level of certification the project is going for, at
what point the modeling services are engaged in the design, and the type and
complexity of the building (systems). That's not to say the number of manhours
is completely independent of building size (square footage), but its not
particularly sensitive to it. I find that that there is a high "low" and low
"high" for modeling. In other words, it's hard to complete an energy model in
less than 60-80 hours (all said and done - paperwork, LEED responses etc), but
it rarely take more than 250 hours. (Although, some rare complex projects going
for platinmum could take up to 350 hours). Like others, I find the norm for a
reasonably complex bldg going for LEED silver or gold typically requires between
120 and 160 hours.
Marcus
Here's my two cents on below. I will look for the public comment period as
well. Thanks for the heads up.
I think the idea of incentivizing modeling early in the design is a great idea,
but I think requiring it is completely inappropriate. Perhaps it could be
encouraged by awarding an extra (innovation? or EA cr 1?) point for starting
modeling in schematic design. Or, perhaps the credit could be restructured
similar to the CX credits where in order to get the enhanced CX credits, you
have to have the CX agent involved early in the design. In some ways, the
current set up already does this though with the progress points for increased
levels of saving. Quite frankly, if you are going for 50% savings, you're not
gonig to get there unless you start modeling really early in the process.
I also think prescribing a certain minimum number of ECMs to look at is
inappropriate and would probably have the adverse effect of discouraging energy
modeling. The appropriate number of ECMs is highly project dependent - based on
building size, scope, complexity, type, level of LEED certification shooting
for, and not least of all the owner's budget. Let's face it, the vast majority
of bldgs out there and that consume most of the energy in the US are (strip)
malls, grocery stores, restaurants etc. These projects barely event have a
schematic, design and CD phase. While we all love to work on the exotic,
platinum level, cutting edge, bldgs that are likely to have a large budget for
design, these are not the majority of bldgs consuming energy. I think we should
be doing more to encourage modeling and energy savings amongst the every day
projects than the "sexy" projects. It seems to me the best way to do this is to
offer incentives in this direction in lieu of prescriptive requirements that
could discourage/put off smaller projects from even attempting to incorporate
modeling.
Julia
________________________________
From: Marcus Sheffer <sheffer at energyopportunities.com>
To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Sent: Fri, May 13, 2011 8:16:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost
If anyone has any good ideas about how to structure the LEED credits to end the
practice of validation models at the end and encourage/require design phase
modeling the folks on the USGBC EA TAG would love to hear them. The current
proposed credit language from the first public comment phase is listed below.
NC, CS, SCHOOLS, RETAIL, WAREHOUSE & DISTRIBUTION CENTERS, HOSPITALITY
Establish an energy performance target no later than the schematic design phase.
The target must be established as kBTU per square foot-year of source energy
use. This target must be mapped on the same scale as the baseline and proposed
buildings, if the project follows Option 1.
OPTION 1. Whole Building Energy Simulation
Analyze a minimum of at least nine efficiency measures during the design process
and account for the results in design decision-making. Analysis can include
energy simulation of efficiency opportunities, application of past energy
simulation analyses for similar projects to the project, or application of
published data from energy analyses performed for similar projects to the
project (such as AEDGs).
A minimum of six energy efficiency measures focused on load reduction strategies
appropriate for the facility must be analyzed. This analysis must be performed
during the schematic design phase.
A minimum of three energy efficiency measures focused on HVAC related strategies
must be analyzed (passive measures are acceptable). This analysis must be
performed before the conclusion of the design development phase.
The results of the analysis must be summarized in a brief report or memorandum.
The next version of LEED will be going out for public comment again in July, I
think, so please comment formally as well as discussing here.
Marcus Sheffer
Energy Opportunities, Inc/a 7group Company
1200 E Camping Area Road, Wellsville, PA 17365
717-292-2636, sheffer at sevengroup.com
www.sevengroup.com
From:John Aulbach [mailto:jra_sac at yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 7:46 PM
To: Carol Gardner; Marcus Sheffer
Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost
OK, Carol..now you threw the "bait" out there..older than dirt, eh?
I have done very limited LEED "type" modeling where you compare 20 walls and 40
windows types (well, it seemed that way). Correct me if I am wrong, but a Base
model must be built to comply with a certain level of ASHRAE 90.1 (now up to
2010 ??). With all of the nuisances of eQuest 3.64, I am going to build the
model from scrathc and put in all the relevant baseline data in by hand. And,
by the way, the ASHRAE baseline model might be an entirely different system. I
am just completing an EPACT evaluation (ASHRAE 90.1-2001) and the Baseline HVAC
was screwe chillers, whereas the Actual building was packaged units with
Turbocor compressors (ask me how I did that).
It very much depends on the complexity of the building. A 40,000 sf office or a
500,000 sf hotel with casino facilites.
I am unfamiliar with the LEED paperwork to be filled out after the modeling has
been done. But I would not do anything of this type in under 120 hours,
preferably 160 hours. If the client thinks he can do better, let him.
Contingency, contingency.
We won't discuss how old CAROL might be..
John A.
________________________________
From:Carol Gardner <cmg750 at gmail.com>
To: sheffer at energyopportunities.com
Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Sent: Thu, May 12, 2011 2:59:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost
Marcus,
You have inadvertently hit upon why IBPSA worked with ASHRAE to create a BEMP
certification. That's Building Energy Modeling Professional (BEMP).
Some of us who have been in the field for awhile began to worry a couple of
years ago when so many new energy modelers began appearing on the listserv with
questions. Their questions indicated a lack of training and experience that was
worrisome. What made it worrisome was that they didn't seem to realize that they
were as inexperienced as they were; they didn't appear to be pursuing training
to learn how to do what they were doing; and we were uncertain as to how or if
they were practicing quality control. We hoped that by creating a path to
certification that we would give clients one more qualification to look for in
their modelers.
If you have been in this industry for any length of time, and by industry I mean
the overall construction industry, you know that you don't get a lot of chances
if your work doesn't pan out. If your energy model says I have a LEED Gold
building and I'm going to save $4,000/year and what I really get is LEED Silver
and $1,000/year, I am not going to be happy. So, I will probably not give you
any more work but, even worse for all of us, I'll start expressing doubts about
the whole process. LEED - what is it good for?
So, now we all have more training, right? We read our ASHRAE Handbooks and
technical manuals so we know how to model the difficult stuff. We can find any
topic in the DOE2 Manuals, all of which are one line, available, and easily
searchable.
So now we are so good we can do these models in 40-80 hours. Really? Not me and
I've been doing it longer than everyone, except you, John Aulbach. So I'm going
to join Marcus in his rant because he's on to something.
It's up to us to not under bid this work. It's up to us to educate our clients
about the importance of quality in this process. If they think they are getting
the same analysis in 40 hours that they used to get in 120 hours, they need to
be led around to rethinking that and to be reminded that GIGO.
Cheers,
Carol
Thu, May 12, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Marcus Sheffer <sheffer at energyopportunities.com>
wrote:
In our experience a final model, done right, would take about 80 hours.
>
>WARNING – frustrated modeling rant to follow:
>
>Doing just a final model however completely misses the point as to why we model
>– it is to guide design decisions!
>
>
>If I saw this RFP and all it asked me for was a model to determine LEED points,
>during or after design, I would try to educate the potential client about the
>purpose of modeling.
>
>Unfortunately too many projects pursuing LEED are only doing the minimum when it
>comes to modeling and almost completely missing all the benefits. Too often the
>“market” transforms only based on a least first cost denominator basis that
>results in little real transformation. Doing models to determine LEED points
>does not transform the market, save any energy, and just circumvents the purpose
>behind LEED. (the next version actually requires design phase modeling!)
>
>Any “modeler” who does only final models without attempting to explain to the
>owner why this is a bad idea should be “drummed out of the corp” in my humble
>opinion.
>
>The problem is that if you respond to this RFP with 120 or 160 or more hours to
>really do the design phase modeling right, you will go up against the “modeler”
>who claims to be able to do it in far less time. So how do we get the folks who
>issue the RFPs to ask for a proper scope of work so that they can compare fees
>on a level playing field? It is unfortunate that we are even having a
>discussion about doing modeling work in opposition to its purpose.
>
>Sorry for the rant but I feel better now. J
>
>Marcus Sheffer
>Energy Opportunities, Inc/a 7group Company
>1200 E Camping Area Road, Wellsville, PA 17365
>717-292-2636, sheffer at sevengroup.com
>www.sevengroup.com
>
>From:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
>[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of DembaNdiaye
>Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 4:28 PM
>To: Omar Delgado; bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
>Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost
>
>Omar,
>
>I would expect, for a building this size, approximately 40 hours (multiply by
>your hourly rate). The 40 hours include EAp2/EAc1 LEED documentation, and any
>review you may have to respond to later.
>
>Now, given that you have never done a LEED model, it will take you more time,
>possibly up to 40 more hours.
>
>HTH,
>
>_______________
>DembaNDIAYE
>
>From:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
>[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Omar Delgado
>Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 7:08 PM
>To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
>Subject: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost
>
>Greetings everyone,
>
>I have a question regarding the cost of an energy model for a LEED project.
>Every energy model I've done so far has been for
>
>existing buildings, mainly for optimization purposes. However, I received an RFP
>to model a five-story, 41,500 sq. ft. building
>that's currently on the design phase and is pursuing the LEED-NC Silver
>certification. I really have no idea what would be a fair
>
>price for this model since I'm going to have to use Appendix G (ASHRAE 90.1) to
>evaluate the difference between the base
>
>and proposed buildings. I don't know how much extra effort this will take. I
>know the procedure, just haven't done it before.
>
>Can you shed any light on this issue?
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>Omar A. Delgado Colón, P.E., MEnvM., LEED AP BD&C
>Vice President
>EnerMech
>PMB 340
>130 Winston Churchill Ave.
>San Juan, PR 00926-6018
>Cel. (787) 224-6537
>odelgado at enermechpr.com
>info at enermechpr.com
>www.enermechpr.com
>
>
>
> Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail
>This Email is covered by the Electronics Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C.
>Sections 2510-2521 and is legally priviliged. The information in this email is
>personal and confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to
>this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an intended recipient,
>you must not read, use or disseminate the information contained in the email.
>Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may
>be subject to Attorney/Client privilege and/or Work Product. You are hereby
>notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communications
>is strictly prohibited.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
--
Carol Gardner PE
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110513/5ffe9b66/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 278 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110513/5ffe9b66/attachment-0002.gif>
More information about the Bldg-sim
mailing list