<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PostalCode"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="Street"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="address"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="State" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PersonName" downloadurl="http://www.microsoft.com"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Lucida Console";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 4 5 4 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAutoSig, li.MsoAutoSig, div.MsoAutoSig
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>My understanding of the 25% default
provision in LEED 2.2 for EAc1 is that this is a minimum for the baseline and
the proposed. The credit language says that to go less than 25% of
baseline energy cost (appears to imply for baseline and design) that this be
documented. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Separately, further down, the credit language
states that the process loads shall be identical in the design and the base and
that credit for process savings in the proposed design that result in energy
cost savings can be documented by Exceptional Calculation. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>The 25% came about to create a basis for
having the 2.2 EAc1 points start out calibrated to provided similar point
results when non-regulated loads were added to the scoring while they were
excluded under LEED 2.1. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I believe this should be interpreted that
the models have the same process loads in baseline and design, and that this be
set to a minimum of 25% unless design documentation supports a different
process load to be used in both baseline and proposed. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Separately, savings credit for proposed
can be taken with Exceptional Calculation.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Has anyone done a CIR to clarify the
intent of this muddled languae in the 2.2. reference guide? This is not an
Appendix G problem but in the LEED 2.2. Reference Guide. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Brian<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoAutoSig><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><font size=2
color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:navy'>Thornton</span></font></st1:place></st1:City><font size=2
color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:navy'> Energy Consulting<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoAutoSig><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
11.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>p. 503-231-6600 f. 503-231-3555<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoAutoSig><st1:PersonName w:st="on"><font size=2 color=navy
face=Arial><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>thorntonenergy@comcast.net</span></font></st1:PersonName><font
size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] <b><span style='font-weight:bold'>On
Behalf Of </span></b>Varkie Thomas<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, March 06, 2007 9:23
AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> BLDG-SIM@gard.com<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Cc:</span></b> BLDG-SIM@gard.com<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> [BLDG-SIM] Process Loads
and LEED</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Vaibhav:
Your reference makes the situation worse. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The LEED
energy savings rating system using the bottom line <strong><b><font color=red
face="Times New Roman"><span style='color:red'>percent</span></font></b></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><b><font
color=red face="Times New Roman"><span style='color:red'>cost</span></font></b></strong> for
the baseline building". <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>What has
the <font color=black><span style='color:black'>process energy cost</span></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?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>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).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>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. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>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. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Process
loads do not affect energy code and Std-90 compliance since "<font
color=black><span style='color:black'>percentages</span></font>" are
not involved. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>V.C.
Thomas<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><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> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Hope this
helps.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Vaibhav
Potnis <br>
<a href="http://www.greenbuildingservices.com/" target=1>www.greenbuildingservices.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=1
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
<hr size=1 width="100%" noshade color="#a0c6e5" align=center>
</span></font></div>
<p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>From: <i><span style='font-style:
italic'>"Brandon Nichols" <BrandonN@Hargis.biz></span></i><br>
Reply-To: <i><span style='font-style:italic'>BrandonN@Hargis.biz</span></i><br>
To: <i><span style='font-style:italic'><BLDG-SIM@gard.com></span></i><br>
Subject: <i><span style='font-style:italic'>[BLDG-SIM] Process Loads and LEED</span></i><br>
Date: <i><span style='font-style:italic'>Mon, 5 Mar 2007 11:05:04 -0800</span></i><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #A0C6E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;
margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>Varkie,</span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>Something we
have been noticing in schools lately is a high receptacle load, which we
believe is attributable to increased usage of computers, 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 size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>In researching
an energy question for a school today, I came across this web page and
case study which I thought was relevant to your question:</span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'><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></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma'><a
href="http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/power_mgt/North_Thurston_Case_Study.pdf"
target=1><font size=2 face="Lucida Console"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Lucida Console"'>http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/power_mgt/North_Thurston_Case_Study.pdf</span></font></a></span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>Essentially
they summarize how, by consistently implementing power management on computer
monitors and CPUs using a simple utility program, a cost savings
of an estimated $15-$30 per computer per year can be realized (on personal
workstations I would add, not systems required to be continuously
online). Multiplied across thousands of computers, the bottom line annual
savings can be substantial.</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>How to account
for this in energy modeling software I have a general idea:</span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>1) Assign the
baseline receptacle load to "occupied hours"; e.g. 5 W/SF
'always on'</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>2) Assign
a diversified receptacle load schedule to the alternate analyses</span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>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></font><font size=1
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face="Lucida Console"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";color:blue'>Regards</span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=2 color=blue
face="Lucida Console"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Lucida Console";
color:blue'>Brandon Nichols, PE<br>
Mechanical<br>
HARGIS ENGINEERS<br>
<st1:Street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">600 Stewart St</st1:address></st1:Street><br>
<st1:address w:st="on"><st1:Street w:st="on">Suite</st1:Street> 1000</st1:address><br>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Seattle</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">WA</st1:State>
<st1:PostalCode w:st="on">98101</st1:PostalCode></st1:place><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></span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=1
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] <b><span style='font-weight:bold'>On
Behalf Of </span></b>Varkie Thomas<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Monday, March 05, 2007 7:14
AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> BLDG-SIM@gard.com<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> [BLDG-SIM] Process Loads
and LEED</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>LEED-NC
Version 2.2 page 173 "Optimize Energy Performance" states
"Demonstrate a <strong><b><font color=red face=Tahoma><span
style='font-family:Tahoma;color:red'>percentage</span></font></b></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
--- "<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>On
page 174 "For EA Credit 1, process loads shall be identical for both the
baseline building performance and the proposed building performance"<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'>I
am looking at a financial institution building with high occupancy and
receptacle load densities.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'> -----
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> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>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?</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>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?</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>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.</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>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.</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>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.</span></font><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Hope this helps!</span></font><font
size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>David</span></font><font size=1
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:Tahoma'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=1 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:8.5pt;
font-family:Tahoma'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<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>
</html>