[Equest-users] Source VS site EUI (UNCLASSIFIED)

[Eurek, John S NWO]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Not a complete answer. May not even be correct, but it may stir discussion.

1.  When running an 80% furnace, the 'sight energy' may be 100,000 btu, but the actual energy delivered to the site is 125,000 btu. But you also have to factor in the energy used to deliver the gas which makes the 125,000 btu go up slightly higher.  Since gas doesn't require very much energy to transport the 125,000 btu does go up, but not by much.

2.  Electricity for heating is 100% efficient, but it has a lot of transmission loses, so the 100,000 btus goes up a lot more.

-----Original Message-----
From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Farid Pour
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 2:10 PM
To: David Eldridge; Nicholas Caton
Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Equest-users] Source VS site EUI

thanks for your reply.

I understand that for each eGRID sub-region there is a different emission factor. My confusion is about using source EUI instead of site EUI. I was wondering all eGrid emission factors are calculated based on generated energy (Site energy) and not delivered energy (site). Therefore we might need to first convert the site EUI to source EUI and then use the converted number in the calculation. However, the energy star methodology specifically mentioned to use site EUI.

What do you think.

Thanks

 

 

From: David Eldridge [mailto:DEldridge at grummanbutkus.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 2:08 PM
To: Nicholas Caton
Cc: Farid Pour; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Source VS site EUI

 

I believe that source energy figures in ENERGY STAR use one set of national conversion factors to calculate source energy from site energy for everyone. (Not sure about international locations.)

 

"Emissions" reported by ENERGY STAR for a facility can be specific for eGrid regional differences.

 

DSE Mobile


On Jan 6, 2015, at 1:23 PM, Nicholas Caton <ncaton at catonenergy.com> wrote:

	To my best understanding, EnergyStar's portfolio normally takes in your site energy usage and uses the project's regional location to come up with source figures.  A building located in an area powered largely by hydroelectric will report differently than one located somewhere powered largely by coal plants, all else being equal.  

	 

	The database which comes up with those regional factors is a bit opaque, however, and the regional resolution have changed over time. 

	 

	~Nick

	 

	NICK CATON, P.E.
	Owner

	 

	Caton Energy Consulting
	  1150 N. 192nd St., #4-202

	  Shoreline, WA 98133
	  office:  785.410.3317

	www.catonenergy.com

	 

	From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Farid Pour
	Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 10:05 AM
	To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
	Subject: [Equest-users] Source VS site EUI

	 

	Hi,

	Sorry  this question is not about eQUEST, but I thought you might be able to help me. I am in process of calculating the carbon foot print of my building. I have the values for electricity and fossil fuel EUIs.  

	I also have a report from energy star (https://portfoliomanager.energystar.gov/pdf/reference/Emissions.pdf ) that explain how to calculate the carbon footprint of the building. however, I am not sure that I need to use source EUI in my calculation or site EUI.

	 

	Can you please explain?

	Thanks,

	Fred

	_______________________________________________
	Equest-users mailing list
	http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
	To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG <mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG> 


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE