Noel's Green (make that SUSTAINABLE) Blog » RE investment

How to Sustain the Energy Efficient Design

noel — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 05:40:35 +0000

I am worried now. A new report just came out showing that 85% of CMMS (Computerized Management and Maintenance System) software being purchased is not being used. This is software that is supposed to be used by facilities managers to streamline their work, but apparently without much eagerness.

An excellent commentary in this months Engineered Systems magazine, entitled Tomorrow’s Environment: A Failure to Plan Is A Plan To Fail by Howard McKew, exposes the weak link in the chain between energy efficient design and the long term operation and maintenance of said design. How do we know they are getting what they paid for?

Too often, we don’t know. McKew explains that measurement and verification is often left out of the design due to budget constraints. I think operations often falls under the radar for lack of understanding the need for verifying. And CMMS software, intended to help rectify this problem by making it easier to manage and maintain the many moving parts of a building, apparently doesn’t get used!

I have mentioned ACCOUNTABILITY in previous posts, and here is another sample of what I am talking about. My worrying is well-founded. Filters need to be changed, pump bearings need lubricating, dampers need to be observed in operation, temperature sensors need to be calibrated and so on. HVAC, even when it is designed to be as simple as possible, is still complicated in practice.

Global warming : just the facts, Ma’am

noel — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 06:20:03 +0000

Some people in communications, and in the real estate and investment arena, have been making assertions that green buildings have economic benefits not worth the trouble and expense. This is to imply that improving energy efficiency and measuring the results is not worth the trouble. I say B.S.

I am not interested in casting shame on anybody, but now I feel compelled to say something. We Americans have to have an opinion, even if we don’t have all the facts. We are watching too much news television and listening to too many talk radio shows: Take FoxNews and their talk shows. They work extra hard to convince us that scientific evidence is being manipulated for political reasons. They draw a specious connection between the Democratic Party, (supposedly led by Al Gore), and scientists as proof of a vast left wing conspiracy. These popular so-called news programs cast global warming warnings as a “plot”, to increase the size and power of government, raise taxes, and so on.

I am not convinced. It worries me that they are unable to present scientific evidence for what it is, EVIDENCE. They question scientific method at the same time. Why do these folks struggle with high school science concepts of data collection and drawing reasonable conclusions? (Bill O’Reilly is so dishonest on this score, it amazes me how many people watch him.)

We Americans have to have an opinion on everything and anything, whether we are knowledgable or not!

Back to reality and engineering. Here is a tidbit about engineering economics that would be construed as leftist by FoxNews. (Of course, they would attack it as propaganda because it is from the Washington Post. Not because they have the facts to contradict it).

quote from Washington Post January 1, 2010

Jack Beuttell, global sustainability manager with Hines (Partnership) , a property management firm that manages 10 buildings in the District, said that questions about a property’s energy consumption have become increasingly important to his company’s potential tenants.

Beuttell said that a building with a “95″ rating from the EPA’s “Energy Star” program, a rank that some of his company’s properties have earned, would typically save a tenant about $1.30 per square foot in annual energy bills over the national average for a similar building. That’s an “incredibly meaningful” figure to tenants, he said.

I like it. And not because I might benefit personally (Full disclosure: I helped engineer HVAC on a Hines project recently). It is just plain simple common sense to cut costs. It might even pump up your profits! Some left-wing conspiracy that is.

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!

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”

What if global warming is actually a hoax?

noel — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:24:56 +0000

What if? Energy independence, green jobs, deal with peak oil , have healthier children, cleaner air and water, save the rainforests….

A better world hoax

Calculating the advantage of a LEED certified building

noel — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:07:23 +0000

This doesn’t need any explanation.

LEED certified office buildings excel

A picture is worth a thousand words.

Additional editorial on LEED and Energy Star marketability

Calculating the tax benefits

noel — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:57:24 +0000

While I was thinking about how to calculate the tax benefits of upgrading and changing or upgrading HVAC systems, lighting and hot water heaters, I decided to see if anyone had made a calculator to analyze it already. Sure enough, General Electric had created this EPact calculator

I have not had the time to test and validate this yet, but I’d be happy to hear from anyone who has. Please feel free to contact me through this blog.

Energy Engineering for your world

noel — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 05:13:04 +0000

Noel Susskind, PE, LEED AP is an experienced mechanical engineer and building energy expert ready to
serve you. Commercial, government, educational and healthcare facilities are a focus.
He will:

Serve as a high level resource on the latest science and art of building, or introduce you to one. Knowledge includes minimizing building energy (carbon) footprint via energy recovery, advanced control approaches , daylighting design, indoor air quality, ventilation, cogeneration, photovoltaic systems, etc.
Recommend energy-efficient design solutions and technologies, including lighting, HVAC, building envelope measures and passive solar and ventilation measures.
Validate and summarize energy audits of existing facilities by third parties.
Identify various alternative energy conservation measures and predict energy usage based on energy modeling. Includes economic analysis and financial projections with payback.
Work with the design and construction teams, sharing and validating others energy models (compliant with DOE-2 and BIM GbXML) as third party reviewer.
Provide documents and regular verification required for obtaining LEED energy credits.
Work closely with you on alternative solutions for building and system energy usage.

Owners: Demand more Energy Modeling for the bottom line

noel — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 23:39:35 +0000

Concerns brought up by Howard McKew of Engineered Systems magazine in the July 2009 issue. He said “Owners, Please Demand More from your IPD team” (Integrated Project Delivery ) McKew cites the fact that the new IPD approach being promoted by the AIA is possibly a lawyers dream to make money in this economic downturn. But then he gets to the point I would like to emphasize.

“If we aren’t careful, the IPD process will be just another project delivery method where, in this case if things go well, the owner will have paid a premium in incentives to the designer and the builder for doing their jobs. What about the long-term benefits of the building systems meeting their operating budget? What about the facility group who should have been a partner in the process, rather than business as usual when it comes to turning over the job to the building operators?

He then goes on to list items that will make this process completely sustainable

* Establish an operating budget in the initial phase of the job as part of the OPR (owner’s project requirements) for utility costs and O&M costs;
* System training for the building operators early in the IPD process;
* Use of other “smart software” (programs with multiple applications) during the design and construction and continued use of these programs by the owner’s personnel in the years following the project completion;
* The implementation of building system monitoring, measuring, and benchmarking process in the performance phase (formally the warranty phase);
* The seamless integration of automatic controls system design with building system commissioning (HVAC, electric, plumbing, security, etc.);
* The integration of third-party TAB with the designer, similar to the designer and trade contractors working together with BIM.

In my opinion, this list is fairly sufficient!

Revit Family Library Screen

Let’s not pay lip service to sustainable and green building practices anymore. Why not do energy modeling on the design concept from the very beginning! We have the software (Revit, et al) now. Let’s use all of its capabilities!! Lets bring it into play in the early stages.

Owners should demand better results in the major operating costs: lighting and HVAC Energy usage. Achieve major improvements over the code baseline (ASHRAE 90.1, et al).

For so long, architects and builders have only thought about energy at 25% or 35% design. Owners, ask the AEC (architects/enginmeers/construction) team to look at the whole picture. (LEED GOLD? The highest Energy Star rating? )
A long standing design and construction rule is, “The earlier a change is made to design, the less expensive to incorporate it in the final product.” The incremental return on investment will be high, maybe infinite, in fact because the incremental cost of paying the designers to implement this upfront is very low. And the savings fall right to the bottom line!

Building information modeling and energy modeling do more than save initial building costs. In theory, BIM permits the architects engineers, contractors and construction managers to put ALL of the data into the “model” as they go. Read my report on BIM for more information.

We have the tools and the training, all we need is the will to do it.

Thanks Frankly

noel — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 02:53:25 +0000

FranklyMLS.com is a superb web site that I use for searching and analyzing residential properties in this, the DC/Maryland/Virginia region. It’s my favorite tool because it is fast, easy and returns latest MLS data in a format I can analyze in Microsoft Excel, text and numericals. No gobble-dee-gook. Other web sites that use this MLS do not deliver this simple function.

I appreciate this because I often feel like I am hunting for a needle in a haystack and I am looking at hundreds if not thousands of potential buys. Having a quick way to filter and pick out selections is imperative when doing a wide search for specific properties, in this case, helping WynkSystems Ventures to find broken distressed houses to buy, renovate and sell or rent out.