[Bldg-sim] Claiming refrigerated casework savings for a LEED project

Paul Riemer Paul.Riemer at dunhameng.com
Fri Jan 24 05:24:28 PST 2014


Jim,
I have not modeled casework in a while but I recall the frustration over defining the baseline and claiming savings.  The LEED 2009 for Retail rating system literature addressed several of these parameters and maybe version 4 does too. When available, it is best to cite their own literature back to them.
Good luck,

Paul Riemer, PE, LEED AP BD+C
DUNHAM

From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Rosenberg, Michael I
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 7:42 PM
To: West, Scott P
Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Claiming refrigerated casework savings for a LEED project

Look at addendum AR as well.

__________________________

Michael Rosenberg, CEM, LEED AP
Senior Research Scientist
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
2032 Todd Street<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0>
Eugene, OR 97405<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0>
(541) 844-1960<tel:(541)%20844-1960>
michael.rosenberg at pnnl.gov<mailto:michael.rosenberg at pnl.gov>
www.pnnl.gov<http://www.pnl.gov/>

On Jan 23, 2014, at 16:51, "West, Scott P" <Scott.West at jacobs.com<mailto:Scott.West at jacobs.com>> wrote:
Jim,
In case you don't have 90.1-2013, Addendum g to 90.1-2010 is the one that added energy requirements for refrigeration cases (see attached, I believe the addenda are free downloads).

As someone who has gone through the exceptional calculation method for process loads with LEED, I would recommend using this guidance as your baseline if you show a significant improvement with your design because establishing a baseline for process loads can be challenging (read:  lots of extra time spent).

Scott P. West, P.E., LEED AP BD+C, BEAP, BEMP | JACOBS | Mechanical Engineer | Energy & Power Solutions | 817.222.8512 office | 817.897.1882 cell | scott.west at jacobs.com<mailto:scott.west at jacobs.com><mailto:rick.zilar at jacobs.com> | www.jacobs.com<http://www.jacobs.com><http://www.jacobs.com/> | www.jacobs.com/energyportfolio<http://www.jacobs.com/energyportfolio><http://www.jacobs.com/energyportfolio>

From: Rosenberg, Michael I [mailto:Michael.Rosenberg at pnnl.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 8:46 PM
To: Jim Dirkes
Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org<mailto:bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org>; EnergyPlus_Support at yahoogroups.com<mailto:EnergyPlus_Support at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Claiming refrigerated casework savings for a LEED project

Jim,

The 2013 version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 added requirements for refrigerated casework. I suggest you identify where your project exceeds those requirements and make the case to USGBC that what is in 90.1 should be the baseline. Good luck.

__________________________

Michael Rosenberg, CEM, LEED AP
Senior Research Scientist
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
2032 Todd Street<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0>
Eugene, OR 97405<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0>
(541) 844-1960<tel:(541)%20844-1960>
michael.rosenberg at pnnl.gov<mailto:michael.rosenberg at pnnl.gov><mailto:michael.rosenberg at pnl.gov>
www.pnnl.gov<http://www.pnnl.gov><http://www.pnl.gov/>

On Jan 22, 2014, at 17:33, "Jim Dirkes" <jim at buildingperformanceteam.com<mailto:jim at buildingperformanceteam.com><mailto:jim at buildingperformanceteam.com>> wrote:
Dear Forum,
I am modeling a supermarket which has made effort to install refrigerated casework that is more efficient than "normal" in three ways:
*             Casework lighting is LED instead of fluorescent
*             Evaporator fans use ECM motors and are demonstrably more efficient
*             The compressors have higher COP
I did not realize that claiming savings from a "process" load also requires substantiation of the Baseline energy for the process load via comparison to several similar facilities or a published paper.  I wish I knew that months ago!
We have data from three other supermarkets owned by the same company, but these other examples are not identical.  So far, all I can say is that:
a)            Manufacturer literature claims that LEDs used in their casework use ~ 65% less energy than fluorescent lights
b)            ECM fans use about 35% less energy in a manufacturer power comparison table
c)            The COP is better (I do not have detailed data yet)

This strikes me as a fairly weak argument, so I am asking you for suggestions or published data to strengthen the argument.

p.s., My last alternative is to ignore the process energy savings and make it the same for both models.  I think the savings are substantial, however, and would rather find a way to claim them!

<image003.png>

"Attack me ... rather than the path I follow and which I point to anyone who asks me where I think it lies. If I know the way home and am walking along it drunkenly, is it any less the right way because I am staggering side to side?"  Leo Tolstoy

_______________________________________________
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><mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG>

________________________________
NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
<ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Addenda a thru ds.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20140124/20ae644a/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list