[Bldg-sim] Indemnity Clause?

Fri Jul 14 14:03:34 PDT 2017

Just saw Nick's comment...
Performance contracting has incentives for both understanding (what's going
on) and optimizing performance - both very good. We need to bottle that and
convince a lot of people that it's a great supplement for business
profitability.

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Jim Dirkes <jim at buildingperformanceteam.com
> wrote:

> Andy,
> Your points are well made. Perhaps they can be summarized by saying that
> the modeler needs to be diligent in creating a well-conceived, well-checked
> model? I agree completely!
>
> Dan's point is what I was thinking of, compliments of my commissioning
> activity. Systems are rarely built to specifications and *very *rarely
> operate per specifications a couple years later. "Real life" has a bunch of
> wild cards that can influence performance in a big way.
>
> I'd love to see a lot more attention paid to actual operations and how to
> optimize building performance while serving the needs of the owner and
> occupants. My standard comment is that 95% of buildings have a 20-30%
> energy improvement opportunity. I'd love to see that opportunity recognized
> and the improvement realized.
>
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Dan Nall <dannall at mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> A case occurred quite early in my career, 1982, maybe 1983.  A developer
>> in Atlanta had an idea for leasing spec office space based upon an
>> all-inclusive gross rent (rental plus operating costs including energy).
>> He built a couple of mid-sized spec buildings in Orlando using equipment
>> and glass selections based on my modeling, and designed to generate
>> "cost-effective" energy savings, with the intent of reaping the difference
>> between the assumed energy cost in the gross rent and the actual energy
>> cost.  I was not the engineer of record but the EOR factored my modeling
>> into equipment sizing.  The developer expected to get the predicted return
>> on his investment.  When that building was about half leased, I got a call
>> from him saying that, not only were his utility bills already at 90% of
>> predicted, but that the chiller plant was already operating at 90% of full
>> load,  He told me to expect to hear from his lawyers.  Fortunately, I had
>> asked him what values to use for peak and average receptacle loads, and he
>> had referred me to his facility guy in Orlando.  He had written back
>> (before emails), that I should use 0.75 W/ft2 peak and 0.5 W/ft2 average
>> receptacle loads.  I went to visit the building to find out what was going
>> on and discovered that the principal tenants were IBM and a brokerage
>> firm.  Surveyed nameplate power densities in their spaces were about 3.0
>> W/ft2.  This time was at the beginning of the office automation revolution
>> and they were both into it big time, with 21" CRT's all over the place. One
>> of them had a digital telephone switch with a nameplate power of 10 kW.  It
>> was in a small room and was cooled, by a length of 10" flex duct hanging
>> through the lay-in ceiling.  It was attached to a spin-in fitting directly
>> in the VAV trunk duct, without benefit of any terminal.  Based on my
>> survey, the letter from the facility guy, and my disclaimer, both I and the
>> EOR were off the hook.  The developer, however, never returned for energy
>> modeling services. So, disclaimers and documentation of assumptions are a
>> very good idea.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jim Dirkes
>> Sent: Jul 14, 2017 2:40 PM
>> To: Dan Nall
>> Cc: Peter Simmonds , "bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org"
>> Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Indemnity Clause?
>>
>> On the one hand, all of my proposals include a disclaimer intended to
>> make the client aware of energy model limitations. The clients are not
>> normally experts in modeling and it's not reasonable to expect they'd know
>> what a model can and can't do. I want to increase their understanding in
>> advance of the work.
>>
>> On the other hand, I'm wondering if anyone has been crazy enough to
>> litigate a situation where actual results and modeled results differ. Just
>> for starters, once you construct and begin operating a building, almost
>> every assumption made by the modeler is immediately, and often greatly,
>> different. How can anyone expect a close match?
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dan Nall via Bldg-sim <
>> bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org> wrote:
>>
>>> This is a very important issue, especially since some jurisdictions,
>>> including New York City, are looking at regulation of energy use, rather
>>> than regulation of calculated energy use.  Liability arises if the energy
>>> modeling results indicate compliance with the code, and later operating
>>> experience reveals a non-compliant building.  ACEC New York City Energy
>>> Code Committee is contemplating responses to this dilemma.
>>>
>>> Have been using disclaimers as one of the first pages of an energy
>>> modeling report since the early 1980's.  .
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Peter Simmonds via Bldg-sim
>>> Sent: Jul 14, 2017 12:15 PM
>>> To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
>>> Subject: [Bldg-sim] Indemnity Clause?
>>>
>>> Just a simple question: how many  simulation experts and modelers
>>> provide and indemnity clause to their clients? Are we all guaranteeing the
>>> results are true and can be obtained? What happens if predicted results
>>> don’t materialize? Who’s to blame/responsible?
>>>
>>> Comments and suggestions please.
>>>
>>> Peter Simmonds, Ph.D., FASHRAE, FIBPSA, FFTI
>>>
>>> Mobile USA: +1-310-383-9911 <(310)%20383-9911>
>>>
>>> Mobile HKG: +852-9227-1640 <+852%209227%201640>
>>>
>>> Mobile UK: +44 7470461689 <+44%207470%20461689>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bldg-sim mailing list
>>> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
>>> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> James V Dirkes II, CEO / President
>> The Building Performance Team Inc.
>> 1631 Acacia Dr, GR, MI 49504
>>
>> (alphabet soup of efforts for excellence: PE, BEMP, BCxP, LEED AP)
>>
>> Direct / Mobile: 616.450.8653 <(616)%20450-8653>
>> jim at buildingperformanceteam.com
>>
>> Website <http://buildingperformanceteam.com>l  LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/jim-dirkes/7/444/413>
>>
>> *Coffee conversation:*They love truth when it enlightens them, they hate  truth when it accuses them… They love truth when it reveals itself, and hate it when it reveals them*.*
>>
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> James V Dirkes II, CEO / President
> The Building Performance Team Inc.
> 1631 Acacia Dr, GR, MI 49504
>
> (alphabet soup of efforts for excellence: PE, BEMP, BCxP, LEED AP)
>
> Direct / Mobile: 616.450.8653 <(616)%20450-8653>
> jim at buildingperformanceteam.com
>
> Website <http://buildingperformanceteam.com>l  LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/jim-dirkes/7/444/413>
>
> *Coffee conversation:*They love truth when it enlightens them, they hate  truth when it accuses them… They love truth when it reveals itself, and hate it when it reveals them*.*
>
>
>
> .
>
>

-- 

James V Dirkes II, CEO / President
The Building Performance Team Inc.
1631 Acacia Dr, GR, MI 49504

(alphabet soup of efforts for excellence: PE, BEMP, BCxP, LEED AP)

Direct / Mobile: 616.450.8653
jim at buildingperformanceteam.com

Website <http://buildingperformanceteam.com>l  LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/pub/jim-dirkes/7/444/413>

*Coffee conversation:*They love truth when it enlightens them, they
hate  truth when it accuses them… They love truth when it reveals
itself, and hate it when it reveals them*.*

.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20170714/660c5b22/attachment-0001.html>