[Bldg-sim] Required Treatment of District Thermal Energy in LEED-NC version 2.2

David S Eldridge DSE at grummanbutkus.com
Tue Jun 10 13:20:55 PDT 2008


Eric, for LEED, your case of a proposed geothermal design against an appendix G baseline wouldn't have to involve the district energy since the baseline only has district energy if the proposed design also does.

A comparison of geothermal to district energy would be on your own terms to decide which system to recommend as far as client economics.  For LEED, you would use the new 2-Step system for your points, which would use a different baseline than in the geothermal case.

Paul, I agree with your interpretation about earning two points in Step 1 compared to earning one or no points under step 2 when considering district energy plant efficiencies.

In effect, this document gives you the opportunity to certify your project by doing the best you can with an existing district energy plant where you might otherwise be excluded from LEED certification if you were forced to include it.  At the same time, allowing those who have more efficient district energy systems to take credit.

David


From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Paul Riemer
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 9:20 AM
To: 'Eric Youngson'; bldg-sim
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Required Treatment of District Thermal Energy in LEED-NC version 2.2

Eric,
I believe this document as written applies only if the project utilizes district energy and so if you are not using district energy, Tables G3.1.1A & B stand.

According to the document, feedback should go to leedinfo at usgbc.org<mailto:leedinfo at usgbc.org> and I have just submitted the following questions:
Does Table 4 direct the comparison of all district energy cooling against electric cooling?
Does Table 4 direct the comparison of all district energy heating against natural gas or oil fired heating?

Is the intent to model the district energy system with the utility rates that it actually operates under?

Are the project's saving adjusted lower if the proposed or default district energy system efficiency is lower than the baseline system efficiency?

Worded another way:
Does the project receive Step 2's point value whether it is higher or lower than Step 1 within the bounds of
1) maximum of 4 additional points by Step 2 over Step 1
2) 2 points shown in Step 1  (because if Step 1 shows 2 or more points and Step 2 shows less than 2 points, then the project would elect not to pursue more than the minimum and thus not document Step 2)

I encourage others to share their questions or feedback while the document is new.  Also, ASHRAE's 90.1 ECB committee is working on addressing the same issue which presumably will result in a publicly reviewable proposed addenda.

Paul Riemer
Dunham



________________________________
From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Eric Youngson
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 4:32 PM
To: bldg-sim
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Required Treatment of District Thermal Energy in LEED-NC version 2.2
SIM List,
                Does anyone have an opinion on whether this document will help to allow a direct comparison between installing a geothermal plant rather than connecting to an existing steam plant in a campus situation (University).`
As I've read it so far this type of comparison is what the document is intended to address, however upon closer reading the actual energy study requirements for Step 2 (Aggregate building / DES scenario) energy model the comparison requires a "virtual on-site hot water / chiller" for the proposed case model rather than comparing the central plant in the baseline model to an "as designed" model such as is the case in Step 1.
Any thoughts on this discrepancy?



[cid:image001.jpg at 01C8CB0B.936F8FE0]<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?1psKUPuX9JdZZWXPPxI04JLB_whB3_zjBYdTWXabP3OtS7ztPp0Z0ynF9kKgGT2TQ1hYGjFRougrAuxa17w09Jd5NBASyCyPtwsyyMrupdwLQzh0qmNAZ0ynF9kQKCy05-bdOzW1Ew1cvSqLMCq8aKCy0eBispmCq80ij-aKDCy0qxYi9oQgiwq80Gd3gsn1wAq83fNFaI3h0DOpKvxYY1NJ4SCrjvvuKYYYr1Fx9>

Eric Youngson



PAE Consulting Engineers, Inc.



503.226.2921 Main
503.542.0567 Direct
503.226.2930 Fax
ericy at pae-engineers.com

Mechanical

808 SW Third Avenue - Suite 300
Portland, OR 97204-2426
www.pae-engineers.com

inspire  interpret  integrate








From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Paul Riemer
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:16 AM
To: bldg-sim
Subject: [Bldg-sim] Required Treatment of District Thermal Energy in LEED-NC version 2.2

Recommended summer reading: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=4176<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?2OVtNCZSjqrXXRTDD3pesRG9pxjCW4i5K00Uc4WC1uh_Y3MYA7lISHY9xEssMyesdTWXabP3OtS7ztPp0Z0ynF9kKgGT2TQ1hYGjFRougrAuxa17w09Jd5NBASyCyPtwsyyMrupdwLQzh0qmNAZ0ynF9kQKCy05-bdOzW1Ew1cvSqLMCq8aKCy0eBispmCq80ij-aKDCy0qxYi9oQgiwq80Gd3gsn1wAq83fNFaI3h0DOpKvxYY1NJcSCrjvvuKYYYr1Fx9>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20080610/1b7fde76/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2029 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20080610/1b7fde76/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 143 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20080610/1b7fde76/attachment-0002.png>


More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list