[Equest-users] dwelling unit / residential LPDs

[John Aulbach]

Chris:
 
Thank you for this insight.I have been working Multi Family Housing and such 
"defensible" number are rare.
 
John R. Aulbach, PE, CEM
Senior Energy Engineer

________________________________

PartnerEnergy
1990 E. Grand Avenue, El Segundo, CA 90245
W: 888-826-1216, X254| D: 310-765-7295 | F: 310-817-2745
www.ptrenergy.com| jaulbach at ptrenergy.com
 
 
 




________________________________
From: Chris Balbach <cbalbach at psdconsulting.com>
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Sent: Wed, December 8, 2010 1:57:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] dwelling unit / residential LPDs


A great deal of research related work on this subject can be found beginning on 
page 24 of this recent NREL publication:.
 
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/building_america/house_simulation_revised.pdf

 
Covers what I interpret are defendable ‘baseline’ assumptions for both 
multifamily and single family (room by room!) scenarios.
 
Enjoy!
 
_Chris
 
Chris Balbach, PE, CEM, CMVP, BEMP
Vice President of Research and Development
Performance Systems Development of NY, LLC
124 Brindley Street, Suite 4, Ithaca, NY 14850
http://www.psdconsulting.com
ph: (607)-327-1647
 
 
 
 
From:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of David Eldridge
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 4:04 PM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] dwelling unit / residential LPDs
 
The only gray area to me is when the design would only partially provide the 
lighting – i.e. it isn’t a fair comparison for the proposed design at 0.5 W/ft2 
if there is some expectation of receptacle-based fixtures to also be included as 
supplemental lighting sources.
 
If the intention is for the proposed design to provide all of the lighting, then 
I believe it to be fair game.  Especially hotel rooms, where the interior 
designer will have included receptacle-based fixtures if they are intended, it 
should be relatively clear what is included in the initial fit out.
 
With apartments or condos I think you are less likely to have the design 
intended to cover 100% of the occupied lighting, but if that’s the case for your 
projects the standard seems to allow it.
 
Apartments are further complicated since the kitchen, bathroom, and corridor 
lighting is often completely provided, where the bedroom and living areas may 
not partially provided.  However, the 1.1 W/ft2 (or 0.7 W/ft2 for multifamily) 
seems to be for a whole apartment including a weighting of all the different 
spaces in a typical apartment.  Maybe the 0.7 W/ft2 is intended to allow for 
supplemental sources in a living room although this hasn’t been my take on it.
 
David
 
                                                                                               
 
 
David S. Eldridge, Jr., P.E., LEED AP BD+C, BEMP, HBDP
Grumman/Butkus Associates
                                                                                               
 
 
From:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of James Hansen
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 2:43 PM
To: Aleka Pappas; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] dwelling unit / residential LPDs
 
Is there a CIR or something that says that residential LPD is unregulated?
 
Table G3.1 is pretty specific about residential unit lighting for the proposed 
model (see below):
 
 
As long as the lighting is shown on building plans and permanently wired, you 
are allowed to use the actual lighting power.   I have done 10+ residential 
projects where we’ve listed 1.1 W / sq ft for the living / bedroom areas for the 
baseline building, and used the actual density for the proposed model, and been 
approved.  There certainly isn’t anything wrong with doing it the ECM route, but 
where, specifically, does it say you can’t take credit for any residential unit 
lighting efficiencies?  

 
GHT Limited
James Hansen, PE, LEED AP
Senior Associate
1010 N. Glebe Rd, Suite 200
703-338-5754 (Cell)
703-243-1200 (Office)
703-276-1376 (Fax)
www.ghtltd.com
 
Arlington, VA  22201-4749
 
From:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Aleka Pappas
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 3:25 PM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] dwelling unit / residential LPDs
 
That 1.1 W/SF from section 9 doesn't apply to apartment or condo dwelling 
units.  Residential unit LPD is unregulated.  We calculate savings for 
residential lighting as an exceptional calculation using a baseline LPD sited 
from research (which is kind of all over the place), and calculate savings for 
installed lighting systems that provide for full illuminance in specific spaces 
in the residential units.  The lighting is scheduled on for 750 hours/ year 
(from an old LEED CIR).  These calcs have been approved in the past for LEED 
EAc1 under NC 2.2 and 3.0.
Aleka Pappas
Building Energy Engineer

GROUP14 ENGINEERING, INC. 
Inspiring better buildings. 
1325 E. 16th Ave, Denver, CO 80218 
Direct: 720.221.1082/ Main: 303.861.2070/Fax: 303.830.2016
APappas at group14eng.com
www.group14eng.com

Group 14 is the Carbon Group on the periodic table. Group14 Engineering offers 
building energy optimization, LEED coordination, commissioning, energy audits, 
LEED EBOM, and greenhouse gas analysis to reduce building and communities’ 
carbon footprint. 


On 12/8/2010 7:25 AM, Bishop, Bill wrote: 
Joe,
 
The dwelling units exception in Appendix G applies to “spaces in which lighting 
systems are connected via receptacles and are not shown or provided for on 
building plans.” You say you’ve worked hard to reduce lighting energy use, so 
presumably, you’ve designed the lighting for the spaces and it appears on the 
plans. Therefore, you are justified in using your actual lighting design for the 
proposed building model, and the LPD value for the baseline, which should be 1.1 
W/ft2 for living quarters per Table 9.6.1.
 
Regards,
Bill
 
WilliamBishop, PE, BEMP, LEED® AP |Pathfinder Engineers & Architects LLP
Mechanical Engineer
 
134 South Fitzhugh Street                 Rochester, NY 14608
T: (585) 325-6004 Ext. 114                F: (585) 325-6005
wbishop at pathfinder-ea.com           www.pathfinder-ea.com
P   Sustainability – the forest AND the trees.P 

________________________________

From:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Nick Caton
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 7:16 PM
To: Joe Snider; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] dwelling unit / residential LPDs
 
Hey Joe,
 
If you’re looking to start somewhere…  I know the NEC (NFPA 70) lays out a clear 
method of estimating dwelling unit lighting loads within Article 220.  It starts 
off seeming high (3W/SF), but there are heavy demand factors that vary with the 
total calc’d load following within the same article: i.e. first 3,000 @ 100%... 
3,000 to 120,000 @ 35% etc…
 
While I’ve yet to fall back on the NEC as an energy modeling resource, I’m 
unaware of any better direct source for residential lighting loads… I imagine if 
you dig hard enough, one of the ASHRAE handbooks probably has something along 
these lines as well that might give you a different sum.
 
I think ASHRAE Fundamentals does have a clear thing or two to say regarding what 
percentage of the lighting load should end up in a space vs. a plenum when you 
are talking about different lamp sources (incandescent vs. CFL…) – something to 
be aware of if you want to pursue this avenue.
 
~Nick
 
 
NICK CATON, E.I.T.
PROJECT ENGINEER
Smith & Boucher Engineers
25501 west valley parkway
direct 913 344.0036
fax 913 345.0617
www.smithboucher.com
olathe ks 66061
 
From:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Joe Snider
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 5:24 PM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: [Equest-users] dwelling unit / residential LPDs
 
I have reviewed the archives and found a few threads on this topic but couldn’t 
find either good resolution, or a clear enough string to reply to, so I thought 
I would re-post:
 
ASHRAE 90.1 App G doesn’t let you include dwelling units in typical LPD calcs.  
They say you need to plug in the same number for both proposed and baseline.
 
But you can apparently pursue exceptional calcs to justify any cost savings in 
LEED.  But you need to show some kind of analysis as to how you chose a 
baseline, such as a study or something presumably that shows typical w /sf for 
residential.
 
We have worked very hard to reduce energy use in lighting in a few high-rise 
residential projects and would like to be able to receive credit for that on our 
energy model.
 
Has anyone been through this with USGBC and / or know of a good resource for a 
baseline w / sf for residential?
 
In advance, thank you very much.  Great forum.
 
Sincerely,
 
Joe Snider
 
---
Joe Snider, AIA, LEED AP
 
SEQUIL Systems, Inc.
high performance sustainable structures
 
1 SE 4th Ave, Suite 205
t: 561.921.0900
f: 561.208.6090
 
www.SEQUIL.com
 
Delray Beach, FL 33483


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101208/6891db96/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 144811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101208/6891db96/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2412 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101208/6891db96/attachment-0004.jpeg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1459 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101208/6891db96/attachment-0005.jpeg>