Definitions and terms :

California Title 24 -2008 = California Energy code 2008 = CEC 2008 = CalGreen

HERS (Home Energy Rating) is a scale where 0 = zero net-energy, and 100 = average energy consumption in 2000. Its a good approach to resolves the issue of the moving baselines. Architectural Energy Corporation has written some white papers on the subject of energy code benchmarking for both residential and non-residential.


A historical footnote: CEC 2005 = ASHRAE 90.1-2007 = HERS 75.
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 and Cal Energy Code 2008 are NOT equivalent (as I had thought).

ASHRAE-90.1-2007 is the LEED benchmark, however, and LEED-NC requires a 10% minimum improvement. Therefore LEED-NC minimum = HERS 67.5

It is pretty common for LEED buildings to get a 20-30% improvement on ASHRAE 90.1-2007. Those buildings HERS rating = 59 to 52.5

CEC 2008 is CalGreen minimum = HERS 53. About the same as common results in LEED-NC

ASHRAE 90.1-2010 is approximately = HERS 50, (has not been adopted by anyone as of 12/31/2011).
CalGreen Tier 1 = HERS 45
CalGreen Tier 2 = HERS 37.

Summary

National Renewable Energy Labs says HERS 37 is the maximum technically feasible without resorting to onsite energy production methods. The rest of the way to net-zero needs alternatives to the typical gas/oil/electric regime.
Pretty stringent stuff that requires much due diligence. As you get lower and lower in energy intensity, envelope hvac, lighting types and process-loads become more important to the rating game. I am just skimming the surface here.

Here’s a good article on building performance. At the left is a graph: a picture worth a thousand words. There are links to many more reading sources on that page.

I think this covers it for now. Anything else you want to learn? Feel free to contact me.

The 250,000 sf World Wildlife Fund headquarters in DC is about to complete retro-commissioning and is applying for LEED-EB (Existing Building) certification. I managed and documented an “enhanced commissioning process” and have helped complete an application to the US Green Building Council for LEED certification that should land them the highest rating, Platinum. Also completed and finalized the commissioning of a LEED Commercial Interiors renovation project for the building. Lastly, I have just validated their U.S. Department of Energy – Energy Star application for the entire building, with a rating of 86 (based on 100).

Another recently completed commissioning job included 80,000 sf of new interiors for the European Commission in DC.

I am providing this service as a contractor to CPM Scheduling, LLC. CPM is a highly respected and growing LEED commissioning consultant that has successful work in over a dozen states from Colorado to the East Coast. I currently act as Senior Commissioning Authority on their behalf.

I have a half dozen other projects, encompassing at least another 600,000 sf, in various stages, and as they are completed, I will tell about them here.

Building Commissioning: A Golden Opportunity for Reducing Energy Costs and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
By Evan Mills, Ph.D.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for: CEC (PIER) July 21, 2009

This white paper contains some compelling arguments in favor of re-commissioning. Money and energy are two items. A building is a kind of organism. We tend to forget that nature and behavior tend to tear and break things down. The passage of time wears things out and we have to maintain our buildings, and just like cars, they need to be tuned up regularly. It’s amazing how much money is being lost by neglecting to do a tuneup. Government and institutional buildings are especially prone to this benign neglect. In government, its often a case of out of sight, out of mind.

Here is a flow chart that I like. Charts are great for reducing complicated processes down to one glance… I like a good flow chart because they are visual, and I tend to be visual, maybe because of my defective ears.

This chart was borrowed from ASHRAE by the National Institute for Building Sciences (NIBS), and is posted on their Whole Building Design Guide web site. Click on the thumbnail to see the full size version.

Some of the 2009 stats HVAC designs that I have incorporated recently into my office building projects are expected to use 30% less than the levels allowed by the local and state building codes. (ASHRAE Energy code 90.1-2004).

Consider that more than 70 percent of existing commercial buildings in the country were constructed prior to 1980 (according to floor area, see this 2001 study) . It is very likely that most of these older buildings consume well over the present building code allowable.

There are no laws requiring them to retrofit. The financial incentive to retrofit is all that exists, and unfortunately, this is another example of out-of sight, out-of-mind ignorance. (and HVAC and building energy use in general getting no respect).

These buildings should be retrofitted to reduce energy use a minimum of 30% and more. Up to $48-60 billion per year is being simply wasted. Wow! That is $200 a year for every man woman and child in the US. Almost half as much as we throw away on the war in Iraq. ($130 billion in 2007)

Hey, what are you waiting for, lets find out where the energy is going!

Lighting… I did not mention lighting: higher efficiency lighting and optimal daylighting could save ANOTHER $20 billion /year easy.

If you still a skeptic, please read: “Working Toward the Very Low Energy Consumption Building of the Future”

]]> http://www.noelsusskind.com/blog/archives/982/feed 0 http://www.noelsusskind.com/blog/archives/874 http://www.noelsusskind.com/blog/archives/874#comments Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:19:20 +0000 noel http://www.noelsusskind.com/blog/?p=874 I want to clear the air about something that has been problematic for years. I do not have the standard degree in my field.

Recently I have been in close contact with many engineering, architecture, and construction hiring managers. The communication has revealed much and disappointed me on a number of occasions as I seek a new employer.

It’s the BSME. Employers are fixated on this credential. Filtering talent based on the degree-type parameter is not always justifiable. The filter does not do justice to the tremendous personal capacity and energy I bring to help make things happen. I have not been lucky in my search, anyway.

There is a serious shortage of good engineer talent. I bring a capacity to handle and coordinate many varying and complex issues of building design and making them benefit all.

MEP design is complex, no doubt, and a great degree of trust and reliance is placed on the project engineer. I am intimately familiar with the design process. I know how to make a design constructable. I promote and enforce high efficiency (LEED certification and Energy Star rating), and otherwise, I always strive to deliver “high performance” solutions.

Experience is the great leveler. I want to make this perfectly clear. My 30 years of practical HVAC and electrical design and build experience is at least EQUAL to the knowledge gained from a 5-year BSME. I bring a lot more than a general engineering knowledge to the table.

So how did this happen? A: In my life, engineering curriculum’s were not available to me when I was ready, willing and able.

I went to college after high school expecting to be an architect. When I attended Miami U, the world was changing and so was I. I was not as great an architectural designer as I thought I was. By the time I graduated, many opportunities and assumptions that seemed inevitable at the beginning had vanished. After I graduated and took my first job as a controls design /draftsman, the path was clearly leading toward consulting engineers, HVAC and electrical design.

When I decided to go back to college for a second degree, in 1996, the electrical engineering (only) curriculum at University of North Florida was small, and seemed stifling. After much deliberation, I concluded that a wider study of information science was more relevant to my future. So the die was cast.

]]> http://www.noelsusskind.com/blog/archives/874/feed 0