[Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost

[Paul Erickson]

RE the potential for double counting and thermal storage, has any thought been given to the value/detriment of storage systems depending on carbon profile of off-peak vs. on-peak emissions?  I could perhaps see allowing the "double counting" (this might be too much effort to implement) if the thermal storage CHW production uses renewable or a cleaner-than-gas (assumed for peaking units) electricity generation source, but not if the baseload/nighttime generation uses more carbon intensive generation mix.

We've add projects with both sides of the coin, and though the financials penned out in favor of TES, it can seem a bit counterproductive environmentally on one side of the coin.

Paul

From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Marcus Sheffer
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 11:38 AM
To: 'Arpan Bakshi'
Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost

The EAp2c1 credit for thermal storage would be minimal I think but it does exist as currently written.  Since the proposed metric is a combination of cost and EUI, thermal storage should do better in one and probably worse in the other.

Not sure how we could separate out the systems in the models for EAp2c1, but you make a good point about potential double counting (not always a bad thing for LEED if it is something we really want to encourage like renewables).

Marcus Sheffer
Energy Opportunities, Inc/a 7group Company
1200 E Camping Area Road, Wellsville, PA  17365
717-292-2636, sheffer at sevengroup.com<mailto:sheffer at sevengroup.com>
www.sevengroup.com<http://www.sevengroup.com>

From: Arpan Bakshi [mailto:arpanbakshi at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 7:16 PM
To: Marcus Sheffer
Cc: Julia Beabout; bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost

While we have Marcus's attention, I would like to rant !

Since the next version of LEED will have a credit dedicated to peak demand reduction, can we make it so that credit cannot be taken for EAp2c1 for thermal energy storage systems?

The peak demand credit already addresses reduction of power generation at the power plant scale, so optimize energy performance can be more true to reduction of site energy.

Too many towers apply no energy conservation measures to internal gains and simply transfer their cooling requirements to their CALMAC tanks.


On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Marcus Sheffer <sheffer at energyopportunities.com<mailto:sheffer at energyopportunities.com>> wrote:
Julia,

I appreciate your thoughts and input.

In my opinion early stage modeling (or a reasonable facsimile) should be required for every green building project.  Doing a model at the end for those average projects serves no real purpose and is frankly a waste of everyone's time (see previous rant).  If we continue to allow this for LEED the market will never change.  Keep in mind we are talking about LEED and its stated purpose is market transformation.  The typical project should not be able to get LEED certified if it works properly in the market.  Right now the market has caught up to LEED in many ways.  If it does not stay ahead of the market then it ceases to have any meaning whatsoever.  So, if not now, when?

I don't disagree that  the current requirements are rather prescriptive and that the number of iterations should vary project-to-project.  I am struggling to come up with an alternative that still requires design phase modeling.

One can still earn the prerequisite without early stage modeling, but cannot earn any points for EAc1 as it is now proposed.  I don't think an ID credit would give enough incentive, too easy to ignore.  There are prescriptive paths specifically to address small projects.

Marcus Sheffer
Energy Opportunities, Inc/a 7group Company
1200 E Camping Area Road, Wellsville, PA  17365
717-292-2636<tel:717-292-2636>, sheffer at sevengroup.com<mailto:sheffer at sevengroup.com>
www.sevengroup.com<http://www.sevengroup.com>

From: Julia Beabout [mailto:juliabeabout at yahoo.com<mailto:juliabeabout at yahoo.com>]
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 10:22 AM
To: Marcus Sheffer; bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org>

Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Energy Model Cost

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<mailto:sheffer at energyopportunities.com>>
To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto: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<tel:717-292-2636>, sheffer at sevengroup.com<mailto:sheffer at sevengroup.com>
www.sevengroup.com<http://www.sevengroup.com>

From: John Aulbach [mailto:jra_sac at yahoo.com<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<mailto: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<mailto:cmg750 at gmail.com>>
To: sheffer at energyopportunities.com<mailto:sheffer at energyopportunities.com>
Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto: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<mailto: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. :)

Marcus Sheffer
Energy Opportunities, Inc/a 7group Company
1200 E Camping Area Road, Wellsville, PA  17365
717-292-2636<tel:717-292-2636>, sheffer at sevengroup.com<mailto:sheffer at sevengroup.com>
www.sevengroup.com<http://www.sevengroup.com/>

From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto: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 Demba Ndiaye
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 4:28 PM
To: Omar Delgado; bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto: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,

_______________
Demba NDIAYE

From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto: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 Omar Delgado
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 7:08 PM
To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto: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<http://odelgado@enermechpr.com>
info at enermechpr.com<mailto:info at enermechpr.com>
www.enermechpr.com<http://www.enermechpr.com/>



[cid:image001.gif at 01CC1492.F425F210] 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<mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>



--
Carol Gardner PE

_______________________________________________
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>



--



Arpan Bakshi, LEED AP BD+C

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110517/4b87ae05/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 278 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110517/4b87ae05/attachment-0002.gif>