[Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans

[Nathan Miller]

Paul,



I think you are being a bit unfair to the reviewers (full disclosure, I 
reviewed EAc1 submittals in the pre-GBCI days, when consulting teams 
performed the reviews).



They don’t go into a review with all of the knowledge that we had while 
building up the model. All they get is the template and the supplementary 
documentation that we as submitters have decided to provide them. Sometimes 
these documents are a bare minimum, and sometimes it is a flood of 
information that is too much to try to go over.



They have to piece together if the saving you are presenting make sense 
given the building and system components that have been described. It can be 
quite a puzzle to figure out , for example, if it makes sense that someone 
is showing 35% ventilation fan energy savings when comparing their series 
VAV system to the baseline parallel VAV system. Reviewers can try to be 
helpful, and point out specific items they want verified, though sometimes 
they do in fact make mistakes and look like idiots for what they are asking 
(I’m thinking of the electric resistance heating question from earlier in 
the thread). Alternately they can be vague with their comments and put the 
onus on the submitter to prove that the savings make sense, but that can be 
equally frustrating to respond to.



Additionally I don’t think it is fair for them to be experts in every energy 
modeling program that is allowed under Appendix G. That is completely 
unrealistic. They won’t necessarily know that one program puts boiler 
supplementary energy in the space heating end use category, as that could be 
different with different programs, and certainly isn’t intuitive.



Sincerely,



Nathan Miller, PE, LEED®AP

Senior Energy Engineer/Mechanical Engineer



D 206-788-4577

 <http://www.rushingco.com/> www.rushingco.com



From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Paul Diglio
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 1:03 PM
To: Pasha Korber-Gonzalez
Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans



Pasha:

No problem, it is raping as far as I am concerned.  GBCI is using 
incompetent reviewers and they expect us to train them.  They take the 
application fees and offer nothing in return except ridiculous comments.

I have a similar problem with Northeast Utilities serving CT and MA.  NU 
offers a modeling incentive of $6,000, an efficiency incentive up to $2.00 
ft2 and a LEED incentive up to $15,000.  They employ reviewers that have no 
modeling or eQuest experience.  One reviewer expected that I would explain 
how custom performance curves are built for an eQuest VRV system.

I told them I wasn't in the business of training their employees at the 
client's expense.  I would provide the manufacturer's performance tables and 
my eQuest curve coefficients, but I was not going to spend time to explain 
how to verify that my curves are accurate.  They need to spend money to 
train their reviewers or hire experienced reviewers.

I feel that the comments that you received from the GBCI were indicative of 
a person who has no clue and is not qualified to review building 
simulations.

Regards,

Paul Diglio



  _____

From: Pasha Korber-Gonzalez <pasha.pkconsulting at gmail.com>
To: Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net>
Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Sent: Fri, June 17, 2011 3:45:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans

Hi Paul--  thanks for receiving my comment in the most professional sense of 
the term as it relates to the economics of the LEED simulation & Compliance 
markets.



I didn't really feel it was unprofessional, but I didn't desire to offend 
anyone with the terms that i chose.   I was pretty sure that I wasn't 
completely alone with the 'feeling' or sense I was getting from others 
comments I've seen with the forum (past & present).



I offer a sincere professional apology if my chosen adjectives offended 
anyone.  (were they adjectives?  I don't know I'm not an english major...) 
:)



Cheers,

Pasha

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net> 
wrote:

Pasha:

I agree with your 'raping' verb and do not think it is inappropriate for the 
forum.  Dan is out of sync.

Paul Diglio





  _____

From: Daniel Knapp <danielk at arborus.ca>
To: Pasha Korber-Gonzalez <pasha.pkconsulting at gmail.com>
Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Sent: Fri, June 17, 2011 3:32:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans


Dear Pasha,



client has already paid them.   DEAR USGBC---please stop raping the industry 
for the money monopoly that you have created.  The sense of GREED is oozing 
from everything that comes out of USGBC/GBCI with a price tag on it or a 
cost associated with it.



I hear that you are very frustrated with the review process, however, I find 
this kind of language inappropriate for a public forum and would ask that 
you take more care in the future.



With all best wishes,

Dan



—
Daniel Knapp, PhD, LEED® AP O+M
danielk at arborus.ca

Arborus Consulting
Energy Strategies for the Built Environment
www.arborus.ca <http://www.arborus.ca/>
76 Chamberlain Avenue
Ottawa, ON, K1S 1V9
Phone: (613) 234-7178 ext. 113
Fax: (613) 234-0740









-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110617/7823b051/attachment.htm>