# Presentation: 481860

## Evaluation of Building Energy Performance Rating Methods ASHRAE TRP-1286 Initial Results

- Jason Glazer, P.E.
- GARD Analytics
- January 2006

## Project Overview

- Today’s presentation
- Overview of many rating methods
- In depth evaluation of five methods
- Work in progress
- Gathered data for 29 test buildings
- Test five methods with building data
- Recommendations

## Overview of Many Methods

- Formal literature search
- Internet search
- building benchmark
- building energy benchmark
- building energy rating
- building energy metric
- Building Energy Measure OR Rank OR Gauge OR Grade
- Building Energy Criteria OR Classification OR Merit
- Building Energy Valuation OR Mark OR Yardstick
- Building Energy Target OR Score

## Overview Results

- 88 protocols initially uncovered
- 47 commercial (focus)
- 31 residential
- Categorization applied
- Use of, or reference to, ASHRAE products
- Range of approach
- Range of applicable building types
- Number of users (subjective)

## ASHRAE Referenced

- Standard 29-1988 – Methods of Testing Automatic Ice Makers
- Standard 52.1-1992 – Gravimetric and Dust-Spot Procedures for Testing Air-Cleaning Devices Used in General Ventilation for Removing Particulate Matter
- Standard 52.2-1999 – Method of Testing General Ventilation Air-Cleaning Devices for Removal Efficiency by Particle Size
- Standard 55-1992 – Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy
- Standard 62-2001 – Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality
- Standard 90.1-2001 – Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings
- Standard 117-2002 – Method of Testing Closed Refrigerators
- Standard 129-1997 – Measuring Air Change Effectiveness
- Guideline 1-1996 – The HVAC Commissioning Process (G-1)
- Guideline 4-1993 – Preparation of Operating and Maintenance Documentation for Building Systems (G-4)
- ASHRAE Handbook – Fundamentals (HOF)

## Use of ASHRAE Documents

## Approaches Used

- Points with prerequisites and reference building simulation
- Comparison with building simulations
- Placement within statistical distribution shown graphically or by score
- Direct comparison of multiple buildings to each other

## Range of Buildings

- One specific building type (laboratories)
- All building types using national public database of buildings
- Subset of building types using specific databases or statistical model for each building type
- Common: education, healthcare, hotel, office, retail
- Broad categories or several subcategories

## In-depth Evaluation

- Selected by
- Level of adoption
- Approach used
- Customer focus
- LEED-NC/LEED-EB –  USGBC
- EnergyStar for Buildings – US EPA
- BREEAM – UK BRE
- ARCH/CALARCH - LBNL
- EnergyPrism Benchmark – Commercial

## Comparisons

- Scope of application
- Empirical basis
- Input requirements
- Output and transparency
- Part of certification process
- Effort and expense
- Influences design or retrofit

##  Scope of Application – Building Type

- Any building
- LEED-NC
- Arch/Cal-Arch
- EnergyPrism
- Subset of Buildings
- LEED-EB
- BREEAM
- ENERGY STAR Label for Buildings

## Scope of Application - Geography

- U.S.
- LEED, ENERGY STAR, EnergyPrism, Arch
- California
- Cal-Arch
- Global
- BREEAM

## Scope of Application – Building Size

- Some have specific building size range
- Certification costs discourage small buildings

## Empirical Basis - Source

- CBECS – US DOE/EIA
- Arch, ENERGY STAR, Energy Prism, LEED-EB
- California proprietary database
- Cal-Arch
- Private databases
- ENERGY STAR (Hospitals, Hotels)
- No empirical basis
- LEED-NC - simulations with 90.1 baseline
- BREEAM – ECON 19 comparison

## Input Requirements

- Building area and annual energy usage
- Arch and Cal-Arch
- Area by space type, monthly energy usage
- ENERGY STAR Label for Buildings
- Building area, annual energy use, end-use
- EnergyPrism
- Many inputs for each point sought
- BREEAM, LEED

## Output and Transparency – LEED and BREEAM

- Several specific grade levels provide simple recognition by others
- BREEAM: Pass, Good, Very Good, Excellent
- LEED: Certified, Silver, Gold, Platinum
- Points allow cafeteria style selection of measures
- Lower resolution - not appropriate for multi-building comparisons
- More than energy: environmental

## Output and Transparency – ENERGY STAR

- Number between 0 to 100 with a specific threshold
- Documentation aimed at analyst
- Threshold of 75 provides user understanding if improvement is warranted

## Cal-Arch Output Example

- Interpretation needed. No threshold.

## EnergyPrism Output Example

-  Like appliance energy label
-  No threshold
-  Unknown distribution

## Part of Certification Process

- ENERGY STAR, BREEAM, LEED
- Recognition to building
- Third party gives legitimacy
- Widely recognized
- Adequate lighting, ventilation, comfort
- Utility or government incentives
- Leveraged by other organizations

## Effort and Expense

- No cost – an hour to self-assess
- ENERGY STAR, EnergyPrism, Arch/Cal-Arch
- 2623 ENERGY STAR certified (Jan 2006)
- With cost – multi-month process
- BREEAM, LEED
- 359 LEED certified (Nov 2005)

## Influences Design or Retrofit

- Point systems for design
- LEED-NC and BREEAM
- Directly influence design
- Incorporate with the design process
- Consumption based protocols
- ENERGY STAR, EnergyPrism, Arch/Cal-Arch
- Indirect influence on design
- May spur energy oriented retrofits
- Do not indicate why building performing poorly
- Added risk trying to meet threshold

## Next Steps

- Data from actual buildings
- Office, K-12 schools, hospital, lodging
- Test methods
- Include test cases for major inputs
- Prepare recommendations for future rating methods

## Questions