LEED v 2.1 Platinum Energy Performance, More than Design

Transcription

1 University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED v 2.1 Platinum Energy Performance, More than Design February 17, University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED v2.1 Platinum

2 Event Co-hosts: Central Illinois Branch, Illinois Chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Central Illinois Chapter of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, fi i and Air-Conditioning i i Engineers (ASHRAE) Event Sponsors: Central Illinois ASHRAE KJWW Engineering Consultants University of Illinois School of Architecture, Building Research Council, Smart Energy Design Assistance Center (SEDAC) University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED v2.1 Platinum

3 Presenter: Tom Abram Sustainability Coordinator University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Facilities and Services

4 Courtyard View

5 Importance of Performance While good design is important, performance is essential Environment and wallet are impacted by actual performance, not design Recent criticisms of LEED building performance

6 LEED Building Performance Data New Building Institute Energy Performance of LEED for New Construction Buildings released March 08 Requested data from LEED certified buildings and analyzed usage against model and average building stock

7 LEED-NC vs CBECS EUI LEED buildings are performing better than the average building stock

8 EUI by EAc1 Point (all and offices) Although the ranges in performance is large, actual energy use g g p g, gy intensity does decrease with increased EAc1 points.

9 Measured vs Proposed Savings Percentages and EUIs Proposed savings averaged 25% while measured savings averaged Proposed savings averaged 25% while measured savings averaged 28%. Many buildings met anticipated consumption levels, some exceeded anticipation, while others failed to meet them.

10 Measured Savings and Related Credits Achievement of credits does not ensure significantly increased savings. Also consider Adv Cx and M&V s impact of actual vs measured. The intensity and implementation may have a more significant impact.

11 Reasons for Performance Gaps Models are built on assumptions Usage levels/schedules may change Behavioral impacts (thermostats, lights, etc) Systems modeled as perfect/functional Implementation Aggressive commissioning needed Weatherization important difficult to model More complicated buildings Advanced controls Complex schedules

12 LEED Rating System On the whole, measured performance of LEED buildings better than the CBECS averages and anticipated levels A significant portion of LEED buildings are not performing well Corrective actions Better, more realistic modeled assumptions More aggressive commissioning and Measurement & Verification Sustained operation must emphasize energy Knowledgeable and assertive users New LEED projects must submit 5 years of performance data

13 LEED Influence How do non-leed buildings compare in their proposed to measured performance? LEED helps argument for verification, gives building better chance to succeed LEED is not solely about energy efficiency

14 Presenter: Kent trift Reifsteck Director Engineering gservices University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Facilities and Services

15 UIUC and the USGBC LEED Building Rating System United States Green Building Council LEED NC - New Construction All Projects over $ 5 Million New Construction Major Renovations Certified Silver Level

16 LEED ADVANTAGES Comprehensive Rating System Sustainable Design - Lower Environ Impact Design Concepts Mostly Similar to Building Standards Life Cycle Cost Solutions (Capital, Energy, Maint.) Integrated Design Process Inherent Quality Control (Cx, ASHRAE, SMACNA)

17 LEED ADVANTAGES Life Cycle Cost Capital Energy (Building Energy Model) Maintenance Quality Control CommisioningC i i i LEED Checklist

18 Building Location Plan University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

19 Northeast Elevation 10/29/07 University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

20 West Elevation 10/29/07 University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

21 Section North Wing University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

22 Commons View from 3 rd Floor West Side University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

23 University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

24

25 Section - Typical Wing Integrated t Design High Performance Envelope Efficient Daylighting Artificial Light Auto Dimmingi Shading and Orientation DOA with Heat Recovery Displacement Ventilation or VAV Campus Wide Central Utilities University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

26 Classroom Daylighting University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

27 Daylight Sensor Study University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

28 Wll/Wid Wall Window Section Operable Casement Windows Triple Glaze W/ Interstitial Blinds University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

29 Perimeter Heat Eliminated at Casement Window Locations Mean Radiant Temperature Model University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

30 Air Flow Schematic University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

31 Total Energy vs. ASHRAE A 90.1 University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

32 Displacement Ventilation University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

33 Displacement Ventilation Monthly Energy Consumption Mixed Ventilation Option Displacement Ventilation Option University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

34 Site Plan University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

35 Green Roofs University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

36 Courtyard View University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED Platinum Design

37 Presenter Mike Taube Mechanical lengineer KJWW Engineering Consultants

38 Integrated Design ACEC Eminent Conceptor Award Winning Project!! Engineer involved pre Schematic Design essential for system(s) integrationi Strategic locations of - Mechanical chases - Plenums - Displacement Devices Air Handling Unit Placement -VAV Units -Displacement Units Optimize Energy Performance -Building Envelope -Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Analysis Minimize impact to aesthetics

39 Displacement Ventilation Integration of Systems into Architecture Show casing the Mechanical Systems

40 Auditorium Displacement Ventilation Design Early integration of mechanical systems is essential!

41 Smoke Evacuation System - Integrated Design/Low impact to Architecture - Early Engineering input - Mechanical make-up strategy

42 Architectural Elements/Mechanical Design Impact South Glass Architectural Shading Curtain Wall Glass

43 Presenter: Bill Beard Mechanical Engineering gspecialist University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Facilities and Services

44 BIF Electric Use 2008 vs 2009 BIF Electric Use 2008 vs & Jan Feb 09 Un-corrected

45 BIF Steam Use vs DEC Sep 09 Calibrating check DDC vs manual reads

46 BIF Chill Water Use vs DEC

47 BIF PV Generation LEED 2.1 EAc5 M&V option C BIF PV System ELECTRIC (kwh) 6,000 5,000 4,000 KWH Generated 3,000 2,000 1, /1/2009 8/5/2009 9/3/ /1/ /29/ /2/2009 PHOTOVOLTAIC SERVICE FEED THRU METER

48 BIF Combined Use 2009 vs DEC BIF Monthly KBTU per Gr Sq Ft = Sum Electric + Sum Chill Water + Sum Steam BIF gr sqf t Building Schedule April 16t h and allow AHUs t o shut down Monthyl KBTU / Gros ss Sq Ambient F JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 0.0 ELECTRIC (KBTU/SqFt) CHILLED WATER (KBTU/SqFt) STEAM (KBTU/SqFt) avg mean DEC Model Electric & Steam & Chill

49 BIF Cooling and Heating Winter Cycles checking for simultaneous Cooling & Heating BIF Cooling and Heating BTUs 1,200, ,000, , , ChW BTU CRS BTU OA 400, , /31/10 12:00 2/1/10 12:00 AM 2/1/10 12:00 PM 2/2/10 12:00 AM 2/2/10 12:00 PM 2/3/10 12:00 AM 2/3/10 12:00 PM PM BTU

50 BIF 01/27 02/02 Investigating Sequences looking simultaneous Cooling & Heating Chw Load CRS Hours Avg Tons Avg Gals Periods > 38F Periods < 38 F All Periods BTU 346, , Chw Load Avg Tons CRS Avg Gals Hours > = 8 tons Hours < 8 tons All hours BTU 346, , Week equals 0.4 KBTU / Gr Sq Ft!

51 DOA 2 OA AHU & 6 DOA-2 OA to AHUs 1,2,4 & 6 SA Sensor needs calibrating or replaced

52 1 st Floor Only Room 1055T = 64.5 F matching the SA T from AHU-5

53 Schedules DEC vs Actual Comparisons Jan 01st 16th Closed Full Schedule Jan 17 th Mar 19th In Session Full Schedule Full Schedule Mar 20 th Mar 25 th Closed Full Schedule Mar 26 th May 3 rd In Session Full Schedule Full Schedule May 4 th May 13 th Closed Full Schedule May 14 th Nov 19th In Session Full Schedule Full Schedule Nov 20 th Nov 26th Closed Full Schedule Nov 27 th Dec 11th In Session Full Schedule Full Schedule Dec 12 th Dec 31st Closed Full Schedule

54 DEC vs Current Schedules BIF DEC Office Occupancy Schedule 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 100% 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 90% 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 80% 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 70% 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 60% 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 50% 40% Vs. 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 30% 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 20% 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 10% 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 0% DEC Sched Weekday DEC Sched Weekend Current Sched Weekdays Current Sched Weekends 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 500PM600PM 5:00 6:00 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM Occupancy 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM

55 Estimated Impact: of Actual vs DEC Schedules Actual Schedule vs DEC Schedule Impact on Regulated Loads Delta Weekday 1.22 Delta Weekend 1.59 Effective Increase 1.33 Adjusted DEC Regulated Load Ratios Space Cooling 45.5% 3,113,530 Space Heating 13% 888,839 Service Hot Water 14.9% 1,021,839 Ventilation Fans 11% 751,298 Pumps 0.6% 43,713 Lighting 15% 1,027,241 Projected Regulated Load KBtu 100% 6,846,461 Projected Regulated Load KBtu / Gr Sq Ft 41.68

56 Improvements from 2008 to 2009 Commissioning/M&V efforts have already yielded great improvements Energy reduction from 2008 to 2009 Chilled Water Steam Aug 71% 43% Sep 52% 57% Oct 59% 52% Nov 56% 54% Dec 73% 27% Avg 63% 43% Electric meters were unreliable in 2008

57 Discrepancies from Model Projected KBtu DEC using Current Schedule Estimate Net 29% increase to 41.7 KBtu /GrSqFt (Mostly from 33% increase 7 day Schedule) Heating Occupied: DEC 70 ºF Actual 75 ºF Setback: DEC 64 ºF Actual 65 ºF Cooling Occupied: DEC 76 ºF Actual 72 ºF Setup: DEC 82 ºF Actual 80 ºF Slide 40 Simultaneous Clg & Htg equates to 1 Week equals 0.4 KBTU / Gr Sq Ft! (21 kbtu/sf/yr!) Actual clg & htg use above model nearly identical for Sep-Nov

58 LEED 2.1 EAc5 M&V option C Cumulativ ve YTD KBTU / Gross SqFt BIF gr sqft Cumulative KBTU / Gr Sq Ft = Sum Electric + Sum Chill Water + Sum Steam NCSA gr sqft 2010 DEC Projected Energy Model 6,846 MBTU and expected 2010 Actual use 2005 DEC Energy Model 5,000 MBTU FLB gr sqft 2009 Wohlers gr sqft Library Chill Water Loop Mar T B Hall gr sqft Alice Campbell Alumni Center gr sqft Regulated 1206 Business Instructional Facility 0564 Nat Center for Supercomp Appl Includes Unregulated 1206 Business Instructional Facility 0172 Foreign Languages Building 0159 Wohlers Hall 0094 Alice Campbell Alumni Center 0339 Temple Hoyne Buell Hall

59 Projected 2010 Usage Projected 2010 Actual using 2009 Adjustments & improvements Building Schedule now active Ati Active un-occupied idstb Setback Allow Satisfied Systems to command off Revised from Constant SATemp to Reset Investigating program decision parameters Estimate 40% reduction from 70 KBtu/GrSqFt to 42 KBtu/GrSqFt ~ matching Revised Model

60 Additional Opportunities Fix simultaneous heating and cooling problem Bring setpoints closer to model Suggest setting aside specific space for usage during non-peak hours Ten students studying in a classroom on the weekend dinstead of one Plug load survey

61 Final Thoughts Upfront planning and coordination with the occupants Budget setting that spans from LEED integration through final commissioning to M&V Contractor obligations must be met before g occupancy CSV

62 Commons View from 3 rd Floor West Side University of Illinois Business Instructional Facility LEED v2.1 Platinum

63 Additional Presenters: George Freeman Director of Facilities University it of Illinois i at Urbana-Champaign College of Business Steve Hess Assistant Director Office of Information Technology University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign College of Business

64