1 / 20

Why Care About Building Energy Performance?

Why Care About Building Energy Performance?. Aside from building energy increasing? Ignoring performance ratings is choosing to fly fairly blind — staying at the “dumb” end of the “dumb and dumber” scale Performance ratings are an evaluation, quickly, and not an investigation.

nevan
Télécharger la présentation

Why Care About Building Energy Performance?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Why Care About Building Energy Performance? • Aside from building energy increasing? • Ignoring performance ratings is choosing to fly fairly blind — staying at the “dumb” end of the “dumb and dumber” scale • Performance ratings are an evaluation, quickly, and not an investigation

  2. New Construction has been a problem for 50 years, increasing carbon footprint • 2003 CBECS data with malls, kBtu/sq-ft-yr weighted means, higher source energy EUIs in newer buildings • CBECS data show same pattern with each survey year, life-cycle influences are shown

  3. Basic Energy Benchmarking (Performance) Info • Go to TC 7.6 website (shown on title slide previously) • Select Program Activities at bottom • Chicago 2006, Seminar 17, first presentation • Atlantic City 2002, Seminar 41, first two presentations

  4. Current ASHRAE High-Performance Protocol Project • “ASHRAE needs to provide guidance regarding the measurement and reporting of the performance of new and existing [commercial] buildings . . . .” • “ . . . to further the development of building energy performance standards.” • “Measuring and Reporting the On-site Performance of Buildings . . .”

  5. ASHRAE STANDARD 105 1984 to now • BSR / ANSI / ASHRAE Standard 105-1984 (RA99) covers measurement and expression of building energy performance at a basic level, with suggested optional extensions • Standard 105-[2007?] is a major revision and has been submitted for publication. It extends the coverage of energy performance measurement and expression, and comparison of building energy performance against others • The nature and level of performance comparison requires some performance “standard” and requires or intrinsically offers some evaluation

  6. Standards of Comparison • Minimum prescriptions or best practice levels (Stds 90.1, 90.2, 189P, LEED) • Self-reference, e.g., past and future • Ad-hoc building populations • Representative populations, e.g., CBECS, RECS for USA and CEUS for CA

  7. 2007 Applications HandbookEnergy Comparisons using CBECS • Chapter 35, energy management, 3 tables on commercial buildings • Based on 2003 CBECS micro-data without malls • About 50 building types • Site energy use indexes for mean and percentiles 10, 25, 50, 75, and 90 • Electricity and cost indexes at same detail

  8. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey, CBECS • Latest survey micro data available = 2003, next is 2007 (released in 2010?) • Publicly available government reports and data on EIA website • Nationally representative sample, with fairly complicated cluster sampling frame • Different versions have been available, ~5,000 records • Not including imputation flags, there are ~350 data parameters • Data seem to get better each time

  9. CBECS and CEUS, some important differences

  10. Basic EUI Statistics kBtu/sq-ft per yr

  11. Floor Area Distributions, Sq Ft

  12. Week Schedule, hr/week open

  13. Worker Density workers per 1,000 Sq-ft

  14. Density of PCs PCs per 1,000 Sq-ft

  15. Rough-cut, Incomplete Regression Models, weighted

  16. Not done fishing yet

More Related