Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Green Building PerformancePerformance
Metrics
LF10LF10May 7, 2010
Mark FrankelN B ildi I tit tNew Buildings Institute
Does “Better” Mean ‘Good’?
NETNET
P f G l d OPerformance Goals and Outcomes
100 Individual Buildings
Codes/Policy
50
02000 20202010 2030
Approximate Relative Code Stringency
90
100
Estimated !
60
70
80
tensity
30
40
50
tive Ene
rgy Int
0
10
20Relat
00
Limits of ‘Additive’ Code Strategygy
PSZ-GAS-Office FairbanksPhoenix
40%45%
San FranciscoMiamiBoise
25%30%35%
ings
BoiseChicagoBaltimoreD l th
10%15%20%
%
% S
avi Duluth
HelenaAlbuquerque
0%5%
10%
1 3 5 7 9 1 3 5
MemphisEl PasoHouston1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
# of MeasuresBurlingtonSeattle
Performance Regulation Does Not Address All Energy Use CategoriesAll Energy Use Categories
In general about 25% toIn general, about 25% to 30% of building energy use in “non‐regulated” categoriescategories
• Plug loads• Cooking/ refrigeration• Servers in buildings
Occupant-Driven Loads become the #1 Challenge for Net Zero the #1 Challenge for Net Zero
Buildings
Glazing performance –building orientation –cooling efficiency –infiltration –operating hours –climate –weather –occupant density –heating efficiency –duct design –fan size
–windowarea–HVACcontrolsophistication–buildingmass–interiorshading–window area HVAC control sophistication building mass interior shading occupant habits –data centers –kitchen equipment –lighting power density –filter
condition –wall color –lighting controls ‐ furniture configuration –exterior vegetation ‐operablewindowuse insolation glazingorientation wall insulation ventilationrateoperable window use –insolation‐glazing orientation –wall insulation –ventilation rate ‐exposed interior surface characteristics ‐domestic hot water use –number of computers –copiers and printers –elevators –exterior lighting ‐occupant gender ratio –elevation –h l i d l d i i l i li di ib i fphotovoltaics ‐development density –register location –cooling distribution system –roof insulation –building manager training –cool roof –building surface to volume ratio –building use type –janitorial services –metering strategies –commissioning –structural system –acoustic treatment –slab edge detailing –night setback temperature –ground water temperature –humidity –occupant dress code –lamp replacement strategy –roof slope –daylight controls –sensor calibration –corporate culture –lease terms –utility p y g p ymeter characteristics –parking garage ventilation –HVAC system capacity –number of separate tenants –retail space –age of equipment –ceiling height –heating fuel –
transformercapacity–windowmullionpattern–termsofmaintenancecontract–walltransformer capacity window mullion pattern terms of maintenance contract wall thickness –building height –lighting fixture layout –overhangs –thermostat location –exit lighting –private offices –refrigerators –solar hot water –utility meter –load diversity
Glazing performance –building orientation –cooling efficiency –infiltration –operating hours –climate –weather –occupant density –heating efficiency –duct design –fan size
–windowarea–HVACcontrolsophistication–buildingmass–interiorshading–window area HVAC control sophistication building mass interior shading occupant habits –data centers –kitchen equipment –lighting power density –filter
condition –wall color –lighting controls ‐ furniture configuration –exterior vegetation ‐operablewindowuse insolation glazingorientation wall insulation ventilationrateoperable window use –insolation‐glazing orientation –wall insulation –ventilation rate ‐exposed interior surface characteristics ‐domestic hot water use –number of computers –copiers and printers –elevators–exterior lighting ‐occupant gender ratio –elevation –h l i d l d i i l i li di ib i fphotovoltaics ‐development density –register location –cooling distribution system –roof insulation –building manager training –cool roof –building surface to volume ratio –building use type –janitorial services –metering strategies –commissioning –structural system –acoustic treatment –slab edge detailing –night setback temperature –ground water temperature –humidity –occupant dress code –lamp replacement strategy –roof slope –daylight controls –sensor calibration –corporate culture –lease terms –utility p y g p ymeter characteristics –parking garage ventilation –HVAC system capacity –number of separate tenants –retail space –age of equipment –ceiling height –heating fuel –
transformercapacity–windowmullionpattern–termsofmaintenancecontract–walltransformer capacity window mullion pattern terms of maintenance contract wall thickness–building height –lighting fixture layout –overhangs–thermostat location –exit lighting –private offices –refrigerators –solar hot water –utility meter –load diversity
Different Players Affect Building fPerformance
Computers and Equipment
Tenants
Computers and EquipmentScheduleHabits
DesignOperationStaffing Layout
IntegrationInstallationC t d F t
StaffingControls
MaintenanceCommissioning Components and FeaturesCommissioning
Energy use outcome is highlyhighly variable, even f ‘ hfor ‘High Performance’ fbuildings…
Variable Performance of LEED Buildings
140
100
120
80
Actua
l EUI
CBECS
Silver
Certified
40
60
Interim 2030
Gold/Platinum
Silver
0
20
13
Medium Energy Type Buildings
Certified Silver Gold/ Platinum
Design process does not predictnot predict outcome well…
Range of Energy Performance
OutcomeOutcome
• SCHEDULE AND USESCHEDULE AND USE
• ACTUAL SYSTEM OPERATION (Cx)• OCCUPANT BEHAVIOR
Use( )
• MODELED SYSTEM OPERATION
Energy
HP Buildings Tend to be Optimistic About High PerformanceAbout High Performance
3.0LEEDlevel
2.5
2.0(Adj
2)
CertifiedSilverGoldPlatinum
2.0
1.5
Des
ign
EUI
(
1.0
0.5
Act
ual /
1
140120100806040200
0.5
0.0
16
Design EUI (Adj2)
Measurement and Feedback
Property Manager # Energy Star LabeledBuildings
Size of Energy Star Labeled Buildings
(SF)CB Richard Ellis 270 82,135,316Hines 132 73,434,544Jones Lang LaSalle 101 42,540,304gCushman Wakefield 98 36,566,129GSA 75 32,766,272Transwestern 126 30 699 266Transwestern 126 30,699,266Tishman Speyer 44 27,528,281Brookfield Properties 26 20,606,431Macguire Properties 30 15,151,185Boston Properties 32 14,345,309Arden Realty 114 11,860,857yEquity Office 32 12,461,316Irvine Company 36 10,258,991RREEF 45 9 041 878RREEF 45 9,041,878Shorestein 41 9,407,2153% of Total Energy Star 35% of ES Buildings 44% of ES SF
The best performing buildings can’t differentiate themselvescan t differentiate themselves from very good buildings
Reversing the ScaleReversing the Scale;Lower is Better
Energy Star Score
EUI Energy Use IntensityEUI Energy Use Intensity
zEPI zero Energy Performance Index
EQ Energy Quotient
Building gLabeling
Getting Feedback to the Right Audienceg g
Design / Construction
Not operated right
Not occupied as expected
Owner / OperatorT / O Owner / Operator
Not designed right
Occupants don’t behave right
Tenants / Occupants
Not operated right
Not designed right g
Understanding Responsibility for Performanceg p y
Metering ImplicationsMetering Implications
• Who uses the dataWho uses the data– Designer/Operator/Tenant/Code
• How much information to collect• How much information to collect– Energy Star/IPMPV/LEED
• What data to collect– Equipment vs end use
• How often to review the information
Data Needs VS. CapabilitiesData Needs VS. CapabilitiesParticipant Time Interval
Minute+ Hour Day Week Month Year
Designer
OccupantOccupant
Operator
Owner
DataSource
BAS
Energy Star
M&V
UtilityUtility
Dashboard
Dashboard Monitoring Systems g y
Savings From Feedback
Residential
Commercial
Tenant
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
% Savings
Actionable Data and ProxiesActionable Data and Proxies
No Weekend Setback
O2 pp
m
CO2 Sensor Calibration
CO
Lights on when Unoccupied
Scheduled Occupancy
POETEMP OVERALL (0.6)
How cold (0.3)
How warm (0 6)
Comfort Factor (avg rating)Comfort Factor (avg rating)
How warm (0.6)
Temp shifts (0.6)
Temp controls work (0.1)
AQ OVERALL (0.9)
Air freshness (1.0)
Air movement (0.7)
Air controls work (0.1)
ACOUSTICS OVERALL (0.0)
Noise: background (0.0)
Noise: adjoining areas (‐0.1)
Noise: vent systs (1.2)
N i li ht (1 6)Noise: lights (1.6)
Noise: outside (0.7)
LIGHTING OVERALL (1.0)
How bright (1.0)
Amount of light (0.9)
Glare from lights (1.1)
Simple data relationships become powerful tools
Light controls work (0.6)
Daylight amount (1.1)
Glare from windows (0.7)
HELPS WORK (0.6)
HELPS HEALTH (0.7)
29
p p p fto analyze and monitor building performance0% 50% 100%
BUILDING OVERALL (0.9)
Energy SignatureEnergy Signature
120
100
80
red
EUI
Measured = Design -->
120100806040200
60
40
20
0
Mea
sur
Design EUI
• Applying Business Intelligence to Readily Available Data
Automated InterpretationsAutomated Interpretations
3.5
4.0
W/s
f
Heat‐G3.5
4.0
W/s
f
Heat‐G
3.5
4.0
W/s
f
Heat‐G
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
rage
Hou
rly
Usa
ge,
W
Heat‐E
Cool‐E
DHW (E or G) 1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
erag
e Ho
urly
Usa
ge,
W
Heat‐E
Cool‐E
DHW (E or G)1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
erag
e Ho
urly
Usa
ge,
W Heat‐E
Cool‐E
DHW (E or G)
0.0
0.5
35 45 55 65
Ave
Mean Monthly Temperature, deg F
)
Int+Ext Gain
Ref: 11
0.0
0.5
35 45 55 65
Ave
Mean Monthly Temperature, deg F
Int+Ext Gain
Ref: 8
0.0
0.5
45 55 65 75A
ve
Mean Monthly Temperature, deg F
Int+Ext Gain
Ref: 112
• Very low occupant loads
• Efficient shell and ventilation
• Low occupant loads
• Efficientshell, ventilation
• Low occupant loads
• Inefficientshell, ventilation
• Inefficient cooling
• Heating control inefficiency
• Possible solar gain influence
System Performance ComparisonSystem Performance Comparison
hl /
04.55.0
W/ft2 Ref: Site
Monthly Energy / Temperature Signatures(Site Energy)
2.53.03.54.0
Den
sity W total
G: Site total
0 51.01.52.0
age Po
wer total
GSHP school:
l0.00.5
15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85Avera
Monthly Average Degrees F
Site total
y g g
Demonstrating Operational ImprovementsDemonstrating Operational Improvements
4.55.0
/ft2 Reference:
Monthly Energy / Temperature Signatures(Site Energy)
7
8
9
2
Fuel Use Reduction
First Year Fuel
2.53.03.54.0
wer Den
sity W
/ school
L: Before changes
4
5
6
7
Po
we
r, W
atts/f
t2
Second Year Fuel
0.00.51.01.52.0
Average
Pow
L: After changes
0
1
2
3
No
rma
lize
d P
Basecase Fuel
Comparis0.0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Monthly Average Degrees F
010 30 50 70
Mean Monthly Temp, Deg F
Comparison Fuel
Operational TrendsOperational Trends
74 yrs78 yrs
Research Priorities
Green Building PerformancePerformance
Metrics
LF10LF10May 7, 2010
Mark FrankelN B ildi I tit tNew Buildings Institute
