Noel's Green (make that SUSTAINABLE) Blog » Energy

Building Re-commissioning

noel — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:12:52 +0000

A review of

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.

Distractions divert us from what is important

noel — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 15:36:48 +0000

Stephen Covey’s book, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, says that getting to where we want to be requires focus on the “wildly” important. Covey said that it is all too easy to get off-focus from that. Instead, we get pulled off-course by the myriad of “urgent” demands in our every day lives. Covey notices that people who are successful or happy, do it by staying focussed on the “important.” Most of us get distracted from what is important.

Take this distraction: American politics.

We have this terrible engineering and environmental disaster going on as a result of BP Oil’s sloppiness and lack of foresight. They took chances in the Gulf of Mexico and sadly, lost.

Now theres a clip on the news, of a US representative from Texas, Joe Barton, apologizing to the chairman of BP Oil. Apologizing for President Obama making BP take full responsibility for the blowout and the damages.

Barton is acting the clown in a strange comedy of errors. The government never had much oversight over deep water rigs, and somehow, we never considered what might happen when something like this happened. The risk was ignored and there was a failure to plan or insure against it. It was an error to believe that big corporations are fully capable of regulating themselves, (i.e., covering their asses, AND OURS, at all times).

(The engineers at BP might have raised a flag, but no one paid them any mind.)

Now here comes a clown, apologizing to BP to help them feel better about ruining the Gulf of Mexico and the coastal environment for our children’s children. I am ashamed of so-called leaders like that guy. I am distracted from what is wildly important. The politicians in congress done have a clue as to what is important.

Dependence on oil has a BIG cost

noel — Mon, 03 May 2010 22:28:06 +0000

the common Oil slick

The massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is too big price to pay for our dependency on oil. Now we have to re-evaluate our energy plans. FINALLY. The sustainable approach is to stop drilling and spend more money on energy conserving measures and renewables.
.
.
.
.
.
.

In this months supplement to Engineered Systems magazine, there was an interesting editorial
The Way I See It: Saving Billions — One Customer At A Time by Randy Rawson, the President of the American Boiler Manufacturers Association. He said:

“The great unfathomable mystery of why commercial, institutional, and industrial upper management remains so averse to saving money and, where appropriate, increasing shareholder value through greater attention to their energy use continues to dog this industry, despite all our efforts to the contrary.

So why is industry dogged by an aversion to saving money? I am sure it is lack of proper education and understanding. Science and math have been battered and beaten down in the US. So many good brains have ended up playing on Wall Street. This is a case of lots of money and potential income streams “hiding in plain sight” due to lack of recognition by those in charge.

Imagine a mile long parade of armored cars, all filled to bursting with 100 dollar bills, passing by a board room during a meeting. The parade stops for a moment, and then returns to the bank. When the executives ask why the money was not delivered, the engineers tell them, “Sorry, you have to TAKE ACTION FIRST (replace the boilers), then you get the money, you monkeys!”

Report Dispels doubts on Conservation Measures

noel — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 16:43:20 +0000

This Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory report, Building Commissioning: A Golden Opportunity for Reducing Energy Costs and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions should inform the skeptics about the efficacy of this process for buildings. Regular tuneups for your car are the norm, so the same should be for your building.

I quote:

“This report responds to a widely held concern that end-users do not have confidence in the nature and level of energy savings that can be achieved through the commissioning process.”

This is what I think of when they say “sustainable”: The report states that there is a 16% median annual rate of return on investment for existing buildings and and 13% median annual return on new construction. EXCELLENT. How many other investments bring in that rate of return on a sustained basis?

The report continues:

Applying … [this] to … non-residential buildings corresponds to an annual energy-savings potential of $30 billion by the year 2030… An industry equipped to deliver these benefits would have a sales volume of $4 billion per year and support approximately 24,000 jobs.

EXCELLENT!

President Theodore Roosevelt had it right!

noel — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 02:28:14 +0000

Let us go back to the tried and proven. The Bush sponsored tax cuts did not do what they were supposed to do. We forgot to take Teddys advice, as quoted below.

The tax cuts did not increase our national economic vitality one wit. They should be allowed to expire post-haste. Especially since we need the money to offset more energy conservation tax incentives (such encouragement creates public good). US policy should lead the world in energy conservation, not follow!

About taxes, Teddy Roosevelt(who is among my most admired people), said:

No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered–not gambling in stocks, but service rendered.

The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means.

Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective–a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate.

Words to remember in November.

Some of my friends want me to clarify what I mean above. If Teddy had it right 105 years ago, and we had a balanced budget in the 1990s (Republican controlled Congress/Democratic President combination), we should have stuck with it. Democracy like ours really suck when voters get confused and switch the formula, like we did in 2000. Once upon a time, I had a theory about an optimal combination, a Dem president and a Repub congress, and I will be damned if that didn’t work under President Clinton. Looks like we might even get back to that state, but it will take 6 more years of President Obama working with a Republican Congress just to get back to where we were when Bush got elected in 2000.

Better HVAC can save $48 billion/year in the USA

noel — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:16:55 +0000

The latest numbers are that US buildings consume $320 billion/year in energy. 2/5 of all the energy used in the US. And about 40% of the energy (costing $120 billion/year) is used in buildings for HVAC.

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”

Getting a View of Energy Consumption in your building

noel — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:58:13 +0000

Trends: Read the chart on your buildings energy usage. Monthly charts can usually be found on the monthly utility bills. Your utility company can provide them upon request (usually). If and when you can acquire the hourly or daily usage charts, the pattern of usage can be very revealing about whether your building is running at its best. What does a trend chart look like?

An example of a daily building trend chart

The US Department of Energy has a gather and track data process listing the following steps.

STEP 2: Assess Performance
* 2.1 Gather Data
* 2.2 Establish Baselines
* 2.3 Benchmark
* 2.4 Analyze Data
* 2.5 Technical Assessments & Audits

Here I am only discussing Step 2.1, ‘Gather data’.

Daily and hourly charts are more detailed require additional metering devices. This may be problematic, as mentioned further down.

If your building has a control center, it is very possible, and indeed likely, that the consumption patterns can be found in the computer logs. But in many older buildings, this may be problematic. This is where upgrades should start.

Deciding on what to measure and then installing the meters and using the data correctly is the key. It starts by studying the building systems, and deciding what wires or pipes are carrying the energy in question, and installing the meter(s) in the correct physical location.

Next, installing a communication link between new and old meters and a data collection center, such as a desktop computer, creates the data collection network that is needed. The cost of this approach is extremely reasonable, and in fact, with IP networking, whether hard wired or wireless, it is an incredibly simple and cheap way to get a handle on this.

Having the data in hand will help. But one must understand how the building system in question is being controlled. The charts can be complicated. But decomposing the building systems down to their simplest points will yield a lot of valuable information once it is charted. Having your building engineer or an outside consulting engineer experienced in HVAC controls is often necessary.

More reading about energy measurement and metering and a prior article on measurement in Noels Green Blog.

What are we measuring?

Motors, lights and electric resistance heaters are the major electric energy consumers. Boilers, unit heaters and furnaces are the major gas/oil consumers.

Of course, a major component of electric use is the ‘plug loads’, which is equipment actually plugged in. These are usually in the control of the user/occupants themselves. They include computers, task lighting, televisions, refrigerators and so on.

Electric heaters are often being used by user/occupants who feel cold and do not get their complaints/needs heard or met. This is unfortunately, a ubiquitous problem in the USA, just now getting serious attention after years of ignoring.

The next wave

Now here is a very nice “downstream” application for building information modeling. It is not getting much attention. Yet.

The same Building Information Model which is being used to design and build with, can easily be re-used as a framework for the building control center! Why not have the metering and all other energy systems mapped in the BIM? You would have a ready made view of the Building Energy Consumption!

This has been a theoretical possibility for many decades, but the cost and complexity of it was such that no one besides a NASA or a nuclear research lab could implement it. Now we have a chance to see the possibilities of such high powered data collection and analysis being done on a desktop computer. Hooray for IT!

Attention general public : Buildings have the greatest energy footprint, not cars

noel — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:33:30 +0000

The guys over at Autodesk made this cute animation to drive the point home

The Buildings Sector accounts for about 40% of U.S. Energy, 72% of Electricity, and 34% of Natural Gas use. Building energy costs totaled $390 billion in 2006.
The Buildings Sector accounts for about 40% of U.S. Energy, 72% of Electricity,
and 34% of Natural Gas use. Building energy costs totaled $390 billion in 2006.
Source: Buildings Energy Data Book, Sept. 2008

THE LAST ENERGY CRISIS- 1970s and a B.S. Environmental Design

noel — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:10:53 +0000

I have a BS ED, which is a science that encompasses the junction between engineering and architecture. My expertise is in buildings and how they work. I focused all my career on design of the built environment and building systems. I was educated in energy conservation, neighborhood preservation, and solar energy in the 1970s. I was trained to create design solutions for all kinds of advanced issues like

active and passive solar heating,
air conditioning,
historic building preservation
human factors like indoor air quality

I first learned how to do an energy model with pencil and paper. It was very exciting to learn how to design and justify energy conservation measures. Then the Energy Crisis went away about 1982. The energy recovery methods that I thought were so cool were no longer needed or cost effective. But the career path open to me was still basically HVAC controls and design. So, this is what I did, and this is what I do.

To be sure, most, if not all, of my professional peers are schooled in mechanical engineering. ( and they possess a B.S. Mechanical Engineering). I do not have that specialization. However, I am uniquely qualified and experienced.

Like many professional engineers today, my desire is to serve the design and construction industry. Many people do not remember the 1970s. I prepared for an energy shortage then, and I remain ready to help attack the problems of this new energy crisis.

The bottom line! Building commissioning today

noel — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 01:13:04 +0000

I would like to share this 2006 excerpt from the Building Design and Construction magazine white paper on the bottom line of building commissioning.

To put some solid numbers on benefits of commissioning, Evan Mills, PhD, and colleagues at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Portland Energy Conservation, and Texas A&M University (Energy Systems Laboratory) reviewed published and unpublished data on 224 buildings in 21 states, representing 30.4 million sf of commissioned space—73% in existing buildings, 27% in new ones. Total commissioning costs for these buildings were $17 million (2003 dollars), an average $0.55/sf.

Among their findings:
■ An average 11 deficiencies were found in existing buildings, 28 in new buildings. HVAC systems represented the bulk of the problems.
■ For existing buildings, median commissioning costs were $0.27/sf; energy savings came to a median 15% (18% average); payback times were less than nine months (0.7 years).
■ For new buildings, commissioning costs were $1.00/sf (0.6% of total construction costs), yielding a median payback of 4.8 years.
■ Reduced change orders and other non-energy benefits accounted for $0.18/sf savings in existing buildings and $1.24/sf for new construction— “comparable to the entire cost of commissioning,” the researchers note.

The authors conclude that “commissioning is one of the most cost-effective means of improving energy efficiency in commercial buildings.” While not a panacea, they admit, it is “one of the most cost-effective and far-reaching means of improving the energy efficiency of buildings.”

Post-occupancy evaluations can help property owners, developers, and AEC firms determine how buildings are functioning for tenants or occupants.

What can I add to this? Implementation and testing YOUR PROJECT. CALL ME TODAY for a no-cost evaluation