<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3059" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=634184917-06032007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Maybe I am naive, and I have not read the NC 2.2 reference
guide yet, but process loads would affect an internally load dominated building,
ie, my cooling loads would be different hence my equipment selection between a
low density office vs a "financial trading floor" type situation. LEED and
gaming the system aside, from a real design point they are important, and could
affect envelope component selection.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>Leonard Sciarra, AIA, LEED
ap<BR>312.577.6580 (Dir)<BR>G E N S L E R | Architecture & Design
Worldwide<BR>30 West Monroe Street<BR>Chicago IL, 60603
<BR>312.456.0123<BR><A
href="mailto:leonard_sciarra@gensler.com">leonard_sciarra@gensler.com</A>
</DIV></FONT>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com
[mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Varkie Thomas<BR><B>Sent:</B>
Tuesday, March 06, 2007 11:23 AM<BR><B>To:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Cc:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] Process Loads and
LEED<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Vaibhav: Your reference makes the situation worse. </P>
<P>The LEED energy savings rating system using the bottom line <STRONG><FONT
color=red>percent</FONT></STRONG> savings over baseline appears to penalize
buildings with high process loads when you also consider LEED-NC Version 2.2 EA
Credit 1 page 174 "The default process energy cost is 25% of the total energy
<STRONG><FONT color=red>cost</FONT></STRONG> for the baseline
building". </P>
<P>What has the <FONT color=black>process energy </FONT><FONT
color=black>cost</FONT> (or the process energy use) got to do with building
design related to energy efficiency (architecture-envelope, lighting, HVAC,
DHW) except power supply for the process? The process energy within an
office building can vary from 0.5 w/sf (minimal use of
computers and office equipment) to more than 6.0 w/sf for a financial/trading
(Wall Street) type of building. If the baseline process energy is
limited to 25% percent of total and the proposed process energy use is more than
60% of the total then does this mean that the building design is energy
inefficient and does not qualify for LEED certification?</P>
<P>Process energy could be part of the analysis if there is a baseline
standard for various types of computer and office equipment (varies considerably
and hard to define and prescribe for the numerous types processes that occur in
just office buildings) and the equivalent proposed equipment is more
efficient. This comes under "Exceptional Calculation Method" category
along with several other energy efficient building design options such as
double-wall buildings for which you get 1 point (I think).</P>
<P>According to LEED-NC Version 2.2 EA Credit 1 page 174 "process energy is
considered to include, but is not limited to, office & general
miscellaneous equipment, computers, elevators & escalators, kitchen cooking
& refrigeration, laundry washing & drying, lighting exempt from lighting
power allowance (e.g. lighting integral to medical equipment) and other (e.g.
waterfall pumps). Do all submissions for LEED certification include all
this. At the construction documents submission stage, what is the level of
modeling detail that is required regarding floor spaces and zones and all the
systems, plant and equipment shown on the drawings and specifications. Can
you use eQUEST, select the type of building, and let the "Wizard" do the
zoning and assume most of the baseline data? I don't
think we are all playing the same game, on the same level playing field and
using the same rules to show percent energy savings for LEED certification.</P>
<P>I also have some reservations about how various energy saving systems are
modeled with different computer programs. The programs should be
studied and compared with the same case studies of different types of buildings
with different systems and plants and showing how each program should
be used to demonstrate energy savings from different energy conservation
measures such as UFAD. </P>
<P>Building operation data can now be viewed on the web, collected for
meaurement & verification (M&V) and can be used to check computer
modeling results. In the case of a M&V project at IIT, the web based
control systems show mainly temperatures. Sub-meters and data loggers
should be included in the control specifications so that the performance of the
major systems, plant & equipment can be monitored separately and compared
with computer results. At the moment we are comparing the building utility
meter reading with the bottom line building energy use calculated by the
computer program. </P>
<P>Process loads do not affect energy code and Std-90 compliance since "<FONT
color=black>percentages</FONT>" are not involved. </P>
<P>V.C. Thomas</P>
<P><BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: Vaibhav Potnis
<vaipotnis@hotmail.com> <BR>Date: Tuesday, March 6, 2007 8:14 am
<BR>Subject: [BLDG-SIM] Process Loads and LEED <BR>To: <A
href="mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com">BLDG-SIM@gard.com</A> <BR></P>
<P>However I wanted to point out that for a LEED energy analysis, process energy
has to be maintained at 25% of total energy cost of the Baseline Building
Performance ( LEED- 2.2 Ref Guide page 182). I prefer taking exceptional
calculatins for process energy to simplify the calculations as well as the
review.</P>
<P>Hope this helps.<BR></P>
<DIV>
<P>Vaibhav Potnis <BR><A href="http://www.greenbuildingservices.com/"
target=1>www.greenbuildingservices.com</A></P>
<P><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 11px; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">
<HR color=#a0c6e5 SIZE=1>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P>From: <I>"Brandon Nichols" <BrandonN@Hargis.biz></I><BR>Reply-To:
<I>BrandonN@Hargis.biz</I><BR>To: <I><BLDG-SIM@gard.com></I><BR>Subject:
<I>[BLDG-SIM] Process Loads and LEED</I><BR>Date: <I>Mon, 5 Mar 2007 11:05:04
-0800</I><BR><BR></P>
<META content="Microsoft SafeHTML" name=Generator></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #a0c6e5 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=081323618-05032007><FONT
face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2>Varkie,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=081323618-05032007>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=971281318-05032007><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT
color=#0000ff><FONT size=2>Something we have been noticing in schools lately
is <SPAN class=081323618-05032007>a </SPAN>high receptacle load, which we
believe is attributable to increased usage of computers<SPAN
class=081323618-05032007>, approaching and in some areas exceeding 5 W per
square foot -- the kinds of loads I used to figure for "technology
intensive" office areas just a few years
ago.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007>In researching an energy question for a school today,
I came across <SPAN class=081323618-05032007>this web page and
</SPAN>case study which I thought was relevant to your question<SPAN
class=081323618-05032007>:</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN
class=081323618-05032007></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN class=081323618-05032007><A
href="http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=power_mgt.pr_power_management"
target=1>http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=power_mgt.pr_power_management</A></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN
class=081323618-05032007></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=+0><SPAN class=971281318-05032007><A
href="http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/power_mgt/North_Thurston_Case_Study.pdf"
target=1><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT
size=2>http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/power_mgt/North_Thurston_Case_Study.pdf</FONT></FONT></A></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007>Essentially they summarize how<SPAN
class=081323618-05032007>, by consistently implementing </SPAN>power
management on computer monitors and CPUs using a simple utility
program, <SPAN class=081323618-05032007>a</SPAN> cost savings of an
estimated $15-$30 per computer per year<SPAN class=081323618-05032007> can be
realized (on personal workstations I would add, not systems required to be
continuously online)</SPAN>. Multiplied across thousands of computers,
the bottom line annual savings can be substantial.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN class=081323618-05032007>How to account for
this in energy modeling software I have a general
idea:</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN
class=081323618-05032007></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN class=081323618-05032007>1) Assign the baseline
receptacle load to "occupied hours"; e.g. 5 W/SF 'always
on'</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN class=081323618-05032007>2) Assign a
diversified receptacle load schedule to the alternate
analyses</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN
class=081323618-05032007></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN class=081323618-05032007>But quantifying the
diversified load schedule is the hard part -- it will no doubt vary
significantly depending on the occupancy. Though not fully
developed, this may provide a starting point for one method to reduce
process electrical loads in a LEED
analysis.</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN
class=081323618-05032007></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN class=081323618-05032007><SPAN
class=518430319-05032007></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=971281318-05032007><SPAN class=081323618-05032007><SPAN
class=518430319-05032007>Regards</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></DIV></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=081323618-05032007><FONT
face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><FONT
face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2>Brandon Nichols,
PE<BR>Mechanical<BR>HARGIS ENGINEERS<BR>600 Stewart St<BR>Suite
1000<BR>Seattle, WA 98101<BR>d | 206.436.0400 c | 206.228.8707<BR>o |
206.448.3376 f | 206.448.4450<BR><A href="http://www.hargis.biz/"
target=1>www.hargis.biz</A><BR></FONT><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com
[mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Varkie Thomas<BR><B>Sent:</B>
Monday, March 05, 2007 7:14 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] Process Loads and
LEED<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>LEED-NC Version 2.2 page 173 "Optimize Energy Performance" states
"Demonstrate a <STRONG><FONT color=red>percentage</FONT></STRONG> improvement
in the proposed building performance -- " and "For the purpose of this
analysis, process energy is considered to include, but is not limited to,
office and general miscellaneous equipment, computers, elevators &
escalators, kitchen cooking & refrigeration, laundry washing & drying
--- "</P>
<P>On page 174 "For EA Credit 1, process loads shall be identical for both the
baseline building performance and the proposed building performance"</P>
<P>Assuming the same space process load is used in the baseline and
proposed, then a building with a receptacle load density of say 1.0 w/sf
will produce a much greater percent savings compared to the same building with
a receptacle load density of say 6 w/sf.</P>
<P>Page 173 "must comply with the mandatory provisions (Sections --- ) in
Standard 90.1-2004 (without amendments)" There is no mention of
Standards 62 for ventilation & occupancy density or Standard 55 for
indoor comfort conditions. Does this mean that the baseline can be based
on the proposed ventilation, occupancy density and indoor comfort
conditions? According to Standard 62-2004 the occupancy density for
general office space is 200 sf/P (from 142 sf/P in 62-2001 and I think 100
sf/P earlier). This produces a low percent system outdoor air and energy
conservation measures such as "occupancy based ventilation" and "outdoor air
to relief air heat recovery" have little effect. Std 62-2004 (also Std
90.1-2004 for lighting) provides design criteria for a limited number of space
types such as a prison cell (improved from 50 sf/P & 20 cfm/P in 62-2001
to 40 sf/P & 10 cfm/P in 62-2004) . This makes it difficult to
determine baselin e conditions using Std 62.</P>
<P>I am looking at a financial institution building with high occupancy and
receptacle load densities.</P>
<P><SPAN> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: David S Eldridge
<DSE@grummanbutkus.com> <BR>Date: Monday, March 5, 2007 10:36 am
<BR>Subject: [BLDG-SIM] Process Loads and LEED <BR>To: <A
href="mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com">BLDG-SIM@gard.com</A> <BR><SPAN
class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Varkie, I can see merits for the 2.1 method and the 2.2
method. On the one hand, the process loads are to some degree out
of our control. But on the other hand, if you have a building with such
massive load density why would the rating system want to exclude all of that
energy from sustainable practices?</FONT></SPAN></P>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
like the idea of consistency when considering all of the energy for energy
optimization, on-site renewables and green power - there
are projects out there that might earn fewer EAC1 points under v2.2
than under 2.1. The percentage savings were changed between the versions
so it's hard to say if it is more or less likely to earn a certain amount
of EAC1 points - I would be interested to see a summary if the data is
available about EAC1 points under v2.1 compared to v2.2. Probably about
the same?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>For
a high load density building like yours - definitely going to be harder.
The only suggestion as far as EAC1 points that I could offer would that if
your design has receptacle load at 6 W/ft2 there is probably a
significant diversity in that load, maybe it won't turn out as badly as you
fear.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>In
regard to ventilation, you are going to use the outside air requirements from
the proposed design and apply that outside air quantity to both
models. There isn't a "baseline ventilation rate" - use equal
CFM of OA for both models. Also, OA may be determined from local
building codes rather than ASHRAE - that would also apply equally to both
models.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>The
one exception would be that Demand Control Ventilation could potentially be
used in the proposed model to reduce OA if DCV isn't required prescriptively,
and if your minimum OA from code is less than what is required by ASHRAE
62.</FONT></SPAN><BR></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Hope
this helps!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>David</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=632592915-05032007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><PRE>
===========================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM
</PRE></BODY></HT
ML>