<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"><HEAD><TITLE>Cooling fuel type - ASHRAE 90.1 - 2004</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.5764" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Cambria Math;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Consolas;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
P {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; mso-style-priority: 99; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
SPAN.EmailStyle18 {
COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
.MsoChpDefault {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-style-type: export-only
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff size=2>Does
anyone know the rationale behind ASHRAE's change from matching fuel types in
1999 to only using electric on 2004?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff size=2>COPs
of absorption chillers are typically below 1.0, so even if a "renewable" fuel
such as solar thermal is used (and deducted from the EAc1 cost), it may be
difficult to reduce cooling consumption compared to electrically operated
chillers in the reference building. Has anyone been able to get any
benefit from using absorption chillers? </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff size=2>It
seems that the use of a hypothetical reference building as the foundation of
90.1 performance comparisons, often favours very typical HVAC systems.
Perhaps the intent of 90.1 is to increase efficiency of conventional systems,
but using the "reference building" approach as the basis of LEED and other
programs does not often reward innovative HVAC designs. A better approach
may be to mandate specific energy intensity targets rather than % improvement
over a reference building.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff size=2>This
absorption chiller issue fits nicely into the recent </FONT> <FONT
face=Univers color=#0000ff size=2>discussion regarding the performance of LEED
buildings. One of the recent analyses of the NBI study found that although
Silver/Gold/Platinum LEED building use less site energy than comparable
CBECS buildings, they use the same amount of source energy, possibly
indicating a fuel switch/favouring to electricity. The use of absorption
chillers would reduce the source energy and the load on the current electricity
grid, which is a double benefit since new generation capacity often comes from
gas and coal power plants, thus increasing the GHG emissions at the source and
downstream. However, absorption efficiencies are considerably less, so
that may even things out in the end.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=924143315-11062009><FONT face=Univers color=#0000ff
size=2>Luka</FONT></SPAN></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-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Sam
Mason<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 11, 2009 11:24 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Macintosh,
Richard; bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Bldg-sim]
Cooling fuel type - ASHRAE 90.1 - 2004<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">Richard,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">I
assume your building falls under System # 7 or 8 where chilled water is
the Cooling Type. In ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Appendix G section G.3.1.3.7, it
states that electric chillers shall be modeled in the baseline building
independent of the proposed building chiller type. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">Sam<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: Consolas">--<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: Consolas">Sam
Mason<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: Consolas">Atelier
Ten<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">
bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Macintosh,
Richard<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:44 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Bldg-sim] Cooling fuel type -
ASHRAE 90.1 - 2004<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Hello,<BR>I posted
this a couple of days back but perhaps wasn't specific enough.<BR><BR>I am
modelling a hotel in Iran for a US NC project and they will be using absorption
chillers to satisfy 100% of the cooling load. I will be using ASHRAE 90.1 2004
to create the reference building, however I don't see any reference for the
cooling fuel type. It is clearly stated in ASHRAE 90.1 - 1999 that the cooling
fuel types will be the same in the proposed and reference building, but this is
not stated in 90.1 - 2004. Does anyone have any experience modelling absorption
chillers and if so, where is it stated that the cooling fuels should
match.<BR><BR>Any assistance you could provide is much appreciated<BR><BR>Thank
you</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>