Green Building Festival 2012 Do Energy Codes Drive Us Towards Better Buildings?

Chris Piche, P.Eng, LEED® AP BD+C www.integralgroup.com

Context Matters

Toronto, August 2003

Basic natural ventilation principles are still used: • Narrow footprints • Operable windows

Early Designs Built with: • Manufactured materials • Transported from greater distances

Begin to rely more on: • Mechanical Systems • Elevators • Electric lighting

Sick Building Syndrome • world oil shortage – 1970 • Shift towards saving energy

LET IT BREATH!

Y2K & Beyond: Operable Windows Natural Ventilation

Shallow Floor Plates

VanDusen Botanical Garden Visitor Centre, Vancouver, BC Architect: Perkins & Will

Low Energy Buildings

North American Building Energy Code Development, December 2011

ENERGY CODES AND INDUSTRY TRENDS: ARE THEY LINKED??

Current Standards

Ontario Building Code • SB-10 Supplement (2012) – ASHRAE 90.1 (2010) & ASHRAE 189

National Building Code of Canada • National Energy Code for Buildings 2011

Toronto Green Building Standard

• ASHRAE 90.1 – 2010 / MNECB

LEED Canada 2009 • ASHRAE 90.1 – 2007

Additional Energy References

• LEED – New Release - 2013 • New Building Institute Core Performance Guide • EnergyStar Commercial - Under review • CEE (Center for Energy and Environment) • FEMP (Federal Energy Management Program) – Under review • ASHRAE 189.1 and ASHRAE 189.2 - New Release • ASHRAE Building Rating System - New Release • ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guides - New Release • California Green Buildings Standards Code (CALGREEN) - New

Release • GBI – Green Building Assessment Protocol for Commercial Buildings

- New Release • IECC – International Green Construction Code (IGCC) - New Release

Trends – International Perspective

Trends – North America

US DOE Section 201:

In 2014 – 2015 ASHRAE 90.1 to be 50% below the baseline (ASHRAE 90.1-2004/IECC 2006)

Every three years afterwards to 2030, American Energy Code Trends an additional 5% reduction each edition.

Trends - ASHRAE 90.1

Improvements in Standards, Advanced Energy Design Guidelines & ASHRAE Board of Director’s Goals

Canadian Perspective

Provinces with enforceable building energy codes today:

• Ontario – OBC / SB-10 Standard (ASHRAE 90.1-2010)

• British Columbia (ASHRAE 90.1-2004) No other Province in Canada as of today has an enforceable Commercial Building Energy Consumption Code adopted in their Provincial Building Codes.

Quebec is very close to adopting an Energy Code Nova Scotia is studying the adoption of an Energy Code Manitoba and Alberta are moving towards a commercial building Energy Code

National Energy Code for Buildings

• NECB 2011 was evaluated by a consultant and is currently showing a 27% improvement over MNECB-1997

• On par with ASHRAE 90.1-2010 with some differences

• To be upgraded every 5 years with the intent of aligning with Provincial Building Code Update years

Accountability

HOW DO YOU DRIVE THE INDUSTRY TOWARDS A CULTURE OF

ACCOUNTABILITY??

Mea

sure

d a

nd

Des

ign

Mo

del

EU

Is f

or

70

LEE

D m

ediu

m e

ner

gy t

ype

b

uild

ings

. N

BI 2

00

8

120100806040200

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Design EUI (kBtu/sf)

Actu

al E

UI

Actual = Design -->

Optimistic models

Pessimistic models

Rear View Mirror (2008)

Energy Intensity Requirements

• Standard European Energy Code Requirement

• City of Vancouver: Energy Use Intensity (EUI) (kWh/m2/Year) in energy bylaw for 2016

Energy Labeling of Buildings

Energy Labeling of Building Energy Consumption Performance already required in Seattle & multiple US Cities

Measurement & Verification

• Benchmarking Essential

• Building Energy Labeling Compliance

• Energy Use Disclosure

• Net Zero Energy Buildings – looking beyond LEED®

• Living Building Challenge as leading edge standard for sustainability – beyond energy

CAN ENERGY CODES GET HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDINGS INTO THE

MAINSTREAM?

Yes

OBC SB-10 (ASHRAE 90.1 – 2010)

KEY ASPECTS • Lighting

– Greater responsibility when doing lighting design due to the fact that before SB-10, the architect or interior designer provided a light type and we only had to ensure quantity of light (lux) by manipulating locations and lamps with no regard for energy

• Now we need to consider energy as well as lux therefore to minimize energy use we need to fine tune where the light goes. End result is a better designed facility as the quality of light is now more important than ever. (A weak designer cannot hide behind over lighting)

• • Plug Load Control: • I believe ASHRAE has not approached this topic

well. Although wasted energy with equipment left on is becoming a huge problem the Ashrae solution is not perfect. It mandates automatic controls. This requires capital at the beginning to implement. We in the design community need to make our clients aware of the energy losses through equipment. I am finding that if there is no buy in from the owner then the plug load control they paid for is simply bypassed once the building has occupancy.

Previous Updated (2012)

Lighting: Installed LUX Lighting: Energy Use + Installed Lux

Plug Load: non existent (Vampire Loads)

Plug Load: Automatic Controls (Bypassed?)

Envelope: Roof: R-20.4

Ext. Wall: R-11.6 Window / SHGC: Varies on

Window / Wall ratio

Envelope: Roof: R-31.3

Ext. Wall: R-16.7 Window / SHGC: Improved

based on Window / Wall ratio

Drives: Single Speed Drives: Variable Speed

LPD: 0.743 W/SQ.FT LPD: 0.600 W/SQ.FT

Boiler Efficiency: 75% Boiler Efficiency: 80%

Chiller COP: 5.0 Chiller COP: 5.5

Obstacles

Opportunities

Six Steps Towards High Performance

CASE STUDIES Empire State Building, New York | USA

Understanding

Empire State Building |New York |USA

New York Mayor Bloomberg harnessed the green power of Earth Day to unveil a plan that would require NYC buildings – responsible for 80% of the city’s emissions – to undergo regular energy audits and retrofits, as needed, in order to become more energy efficient.

• Chiller plant was retrofitted and downsized instead of replaced and upsized

• Recommended upgrade or replacement of major building systems;

• identified seven more economically viable projects that provided:

– overall 3-year payback

– 38% energy use reduction.

– Reduced cooling load requirements by 33% (1,600 tons)

– Reduced peak electrical demand by 3.5 megawatts

Empire State Building | New York USA

Energy Focused Retrofits

• Radiator Insulation and Steam Trap Savings:

$491,191

• Windows Retrofit: $338,508

• Direct Digital Controls and Demand Control

Ventilation: $858,305

• Chiller Plant Retrofit: $675,714

• Tenant Energy Management: $386,709

• Tenant Daylighting, lighting and plugs: $940,862

• VAV Air Handling Units: $702,507

Total: $4.3 Million savings to date 5% Improvement on guarantee target for 2012

Empire State Building | New York USA

Closing Thoughts

…The award winning new project today

will operate at the worst it should ever perform…

in it’s lifetime Kevin Hydes, 2009

Building projects can take anywhere from 3 to 5 years to go through land purchase, rezoning, and development permit process to turnover.

We need to be looking ahead to Future Proof the Energy Performance of our buildings.

CASE STUDIES Integral Group - San Jose Office | USA

http://www.z2building.com/z2tour.php

Nat

ura

l Day

ligh

t

Net

En

ergy

Use

Pro

file

– In

tegr

al S

an J

ose

Off

ice