[Equest-users] Commercial Building Tax Deduction

[Maria Karpman]

I believe that when modeling for tax deductions, the baseline envelope for
both new and existing buildings must meet the requirements of 90.1-2001.
This is spelled out in Table 7 of NREL guidelines
(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/40467.pdf), which lists deviations from
90.1 Appendix G protocol. I had an exchange with the document's author back
when it was first published, pointing out that this change makes it very
difficult for an existing building to qualify, but he confirmed that this
was  an intended change and that the baseline envelope must be modeled as
meeting prescriptive requirements of 90.1. I am not aware of a more recent
guidance or interpretation that overrules that. Does anyone know if this has
changed?    

 

Maria 

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Nick Caton
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 7:27 PM
To: Justin Tiedemann; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Commercial Building Tax Deduction

 

Fast thoughts:

 

Important nuance alert:  The good news is, a 50% reduction in current energy
use might actually be realistic since you have an uninsulated roof to
start...  However you need to demonstrate a 50% reduction in energy use with
respect to a 90.1-2001 baseline, and that would hinge on whether your
existing HVAC/lighting/walls/floors/windows are significantly efficient or
not.  It's possible.

 

Whether a $1.80*2,750 = $4,950 (at most) tax deduction (not credit) is worth
the time involved is perhaps a more pertinent question to explore first...

 

The 16.67% reduction target, which would require to hold everything else
constant (lighting/HVAC) and isolate the envelope differences seems less
likely to me. I've only once explored various roof U-values for a small
footprint like that, and the impact was negligible.

 

Disclaimer:  99% of my knowledge/experience with the CBTD is using the
lighting-only approach. My hunches here are based more on my general
modeling experience - but  also primarily in climate zone 4 ;).

 

~Nick

cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB

 

NICK CATON, E.I.T.

PROJECT ENGINEER

Smith & Boucher Engineers

25501 west valley parkway

olathe ks 66061

direct 913 344.0036

fax 913 345.0617

www.smithboucher.com 

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Justin
Tiedemann
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:17 PM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: [Equest-users] Commercial Building Tax Deduction

 

Hi All,

The roof in our 2,750 ft2 office is leaking.  Since it's rainy season here
in climate zone 4, we're trying to get it repaired quickly.  We've decided
to add R19 poly-iso nail base to the un-insulated roof.  There is an option
to install R26 instead.

I just started digging into the commercial building tax deduction (section
1331 of HR6) to see if R26 will qualify for the $0.60 or even the $1.80/ft2
deductions.  I've created a model of the existing building in eQuest 3.64.
Given my modeling experience, there is not enough time to build a ASHRAE
90.1 - 2001 compliant model in version 3.63 to compare the energy savings of
R26 v. the baseline R15.  Is there an outside chance that R26, being > 50%
better, would result in a 50% reduction in energy use?  Is there a chance it
would result in a 16 2/3 reduction?  I realize these may be tricky
questions, any thoughts are appreciated; disclaimers are ok too.  

Thanks,
Justin 


Justin Tiedemann, LEED AP BD+C

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101223/327c0434/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- 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/20101223/327c0434/attachment-0002.jpeg>