EBOM-2009 EAc4: On-Site and Off-Site Renewable Energy 1-6 points

Question: Are perforated metal wall solar air heating systems eligible for credit under LEED CS EAc2?" Background: The intent of the credit is to "encourage and recognize increasing levels of on-site renewable energy self-supply in order to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use." "Renewable Energy Systems Eligible for EA Credit 2", "Solar Thermal Systems" (p. 224) states "Active solar thermal energy systems that employ collection panels; heat transfer mechanical components such as pumps or fans, and a defined heat storage system, such as a hot water tank are eligible for this credit." "Systems Not Eligible for EA Credit 2" (p. 224) states excludes "architectural passive solar and daylighting strategies provide savings that are chiefly efficiency related". Perforated metal wall solar air heating systems include a collector panel (the wall) and a heat transfer mechanical component (fan or fans) but typically do not include a defined thermal storage component. Natural Resources Canada considers these to be active systems ("Total energy savings result from four different mechanisms: [including] active solar heating of ventilation air" http://www.canren.gc.ca/renew_ene/index.asp?CaID=50&PgID=347)

Our project is a 238,000 SF brick manufacturing facility in Terre Haute, Indiana. The project consists of 5,000 SF of office space and 233,000 SF of manufacturing area, including extrusion, drying, and kiln equipment. The energy required for the manufacturing process exceeds 90% of the facility\'s total energy load. We are submitting a separate CIR to address quantifying energy savings for the manufacturing process. In the brick industry, the typical manufacturing process (specifically the kiln) utilizes natural gas as a primary energy source. To maximize energy savings and reduce the environmental and economic impact of brick-making, our Client has selected a site that is directly adjacent to a municipal landfill, with plans to fuel the kiln with methane off-gassing from the landfill. Currently, the methane is collected, burned, and flared directly into the atmosphere; however, it can be contained, cleaned and pressurized so that it may be used constructively in lieu of natural gas. Our Client has obtained permission from the landfill to tap into this energy source. As part of our project scope, we will install compressors and an underground pipeline to transport the landfill gas to the manufacturing facility. This will replace the majority of natural gas that powers the kiln and vastly reduce the amount of on-grid energy required by the facility. Our Client will install and maintain all equipment required to prepare, transport, and apply this methane to the manufacturing process. Other than allowing us to tap into this un-used resource, the operator of the landfill will have no involvement or responsibility in this venture. Please verify that landfill off-gassing qualifies for credit under EA credit 2 in this case, even though the landfill itself is not owned by our client or located within our project site. We will calculate renewable energy as a percentage of the total building annual energy cost, including process energy.

Can a waste-to-energy generation facility qualify for EAc2?

We would like to confirm the applicability of a District Lake Source Cooling (LSC) operation as an eligible on-site renewable energy source for LEED NC 2009 and LEED v4 BD+C. This innovative Lake Source Cooling facility, which has been in operation since 2000, uses the deep cold waters of a large lake as a non-contact renewable cooling source for a campus chilled water system. At a depth of ~250ft the bottom of the lake maintains a steady year-round temperature of 39-41 F. The only energy used in the system is pumping energy and the system has demonstrated an 86% reduction in energy use over conventional water cooled chiller. Extensive environmental impact studies were carried out prior to and after operation and all have concluded that adverse environmental impacts have been minimized or avoided. It does not use any vapor compression cycle and no water is wasted.

The LEED 2009 Reference Guide states "geothermal energy systems using deep-earth water or steam sources (but not vapor compression systems for heat transfer) may be eligible for this credit." The project team proposes to account for the renewable energy credit by calculating savings between the proposed case model with LSC system and a proposed case model with conventional refrigeration system that complies with the ASHRAE 90.1 code requirements.

We are pursuing the Offsite Renewable Energy portion of this credit through the purchase of Green-e certified Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). The intent of this credit is to "encourage and recognize increasing levels of on-site and off-site renewable energy in order to reduce environmental impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use." The USGBC\'s guidelines in LEED-EB are not in synch with policy standards from Center for Resource Solutions (CRS) for Green-e Energy, WRI\'s guidelines for addressing Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions or general industry accepted best practices. The problem relates to USGBC in LEED-EB requiring the calculation of TOTAL LOAD from ALL ENERGY SOURCES(including natural gas, steam heat, propane, etc.) on the building energy use side to set the amount of offset; while Green-e Energy states that REC\'s cannot be used to offset anything other than direct electricity generation (scope 2 emissions). As stated on p. 15 of the Green-e Code of Conduct: B. Communicating the Emissions Avoidance Value of a Green-e Energy Certified Product Green-e Energy Certified renewable energy products must be denominated in megawatt-hours (MWh) or kilowatt-hours (kWh). Consistent with this policy, Participants can market their certified products as instruments to address the environmental impacts associated with the consumption of electricity. One aspect of these impacts is the indirect carbon dioxide emissions arising from the purchase of electricity generated through the combustion of fossil fuels, classified as "Scope 2" emissions by the World Resources Institute\'s Greenhouse Gas Protocol. The explicit marketing of Green-e Energy Certified renewable energy products as a means to reduce or offset emissions from anything other than the consumption of electricity purchased from the grid shall not be permitted. Additionally, every other LEED type (NC, CI, CS, etc.) only requires the project owner to offset some percentage of the building\'s electricity use. LEED EB 2.0 and LEED EB OM are the only versions that (mistakenly) include non-scope 2 emissions. We propose to earn EA Credit 2.1 by offsetting only our scope 2 (electricity) emissions, in the percentages outlined in the credit. This will provide consistency with other LEED types and, most importantly, align with Green-e and WRI guidance on the issue. Further, it would seem that fewer LEED EB projects are choosing to use green power than LEED NC, CI, or CS projects, due in large part to the higher costs associated with offsetting scope 1 and 3 emissions in addition to scope 2. Allowing projects to earn this credit by offsetting only scope 2 (electricity) emissions should actually increase the number of participating projects, thus encouraging increasing levels of off-site renewable energy (aligning with the intent of this credit).

ENERGY & ATMOSPHERE: Green Power (EA Credit 6.0) Credit Interpretation Request Washington State does not require electric utilities to provide retail open-access. The Seattle Justice is required to purchase electrical power from the local municipal utility, Seattle City Light. Seattle City Light (SCL) wants to prove a LEED electrical energy product that qualifies for the EA Credit 6.0 to any LEED project within SCL\'s service area and proposes the following approach: Seattle City Light estimates that the current resource mix includes 25-28% renewable generation as defined by Green-e, composed of low impact hydro and possibly wind and other renewables. The utility will certify the low impact hydro component, estimated at 25% of the total mix, through the Low Impact Hydropower Institute. SCL will assist projects to "green up" the remaining 25% balance in order to achieve 50% renewable energy content by facilitating the purchase of Green Tags for participating LEED projects. Projects may elect to purchase green tags from existing or new renewable resources from SCL, the Bonneville Power Administration or other providers of green tags. As a part of the Credit documentation, the Seattle Justice Center will write a letter attesting that the mix or renewables serving the LEED project meets the following criteria: 1. SCL supplied renewable power plus Green Tags are equal to 50% of the project\'s energy consumption. 2. The energy and green tag sources meet the Green-e definition of renewable energy, which includes wind, solar, low impact hydro, methane recovery, etc., and, 3. Green Tags purchased have not been double sold, as verified by contract or purchase agreement.

What is required in order to document equivalence with Green-e certified power

For a project that is obtaining its energy from a small hydro-electric plant, the energy from which is classified as renewable by the local government, is the use of renewable energy from small hydroelectric plant an acceptable approach to obtain the possible points of the EA Credit 4: On-site and Off-site Renewable Energy?

The project has a contract in place for carbon offsets as related to credit EAc4 On-site and Off-site Renewable Energy. The project team would like to show these carbon offsets are the equivalent as being verified by Green-e Climate. The Climate Action Reserve has verified the carbon offsets. These offsets are high quality and the Climate Action Reserve is usually referred to as the best offset protocol. Since CAR has been endorsed by Green-e, is retirementment of the offsets in the name of the project sufficient to demonstrate equivalency?

Our community college campus includes an existing 1.06mW solar field that backfeeds two existing metered services. Additional metered services on the campus are serviced by the utility company campus \'loop\', but are not fed directly by the solar array. The solar array currently accounts for 25% of power provided to the existing campus (documentation available). Two new buildings are under construction on campus. Building A is a new 60,000 s.f., 3-story Office and Administration building, which is fed by one of the two metered electrical services tied directly to the solar array. Building B is a 77,000 s.f., two-story Fine Arts facility, which will require a new metered service from the utility company campus \'loop\', but are not fed directly by the solar array. A CIR Ruling dated 08/13/2007 implies that an existing PV array may be applied to new construction on a campus, therefore we would like to pursue EA credit #2 for both projects. Our intent is to provide documentation to express the anticipated annual energy use of each new building as a percentage of the overall energy use on campus, and to apply the same percentage of the power generated by the solar array towards this credit.

Our project is installing a photovoltaic system that will be directly connected to the building\'s energy system, and which will be net-metered with the utility grid. The system is being financed through a power purchase agreement, which requires selling of the RECs to the public utility. A number of Credit Interpretation Rulings have been issued regarding the conditions which must be met for a project to qualify for renewable energy credits under EAc2. These CIRs seem to provide conflicting language. We are seeking clarification regarding these conditions for LEED-NCv2.2 and LEED-CSv2.0 projects. - CIRs dated 10/3/2006 and 5/16/2006 state that the sale of RECs is allowed from an on-site renewable energy system that claims credit under EAc2 if the building owner or energy system owner purchases a total amount of RECs equal to 200% of the system\'s annual rated energy output each year from another source, which must be Green-e eligible. Per the CIRs, the seller of the on-site RECs must also follow all established guidelines for the sale of RECs and not claim any of the environmental attributes for the on-site system. - An administrative ruling dated 7/19/2007, which updates conditions for on-site renewable systems to achieve EAc2 points, does not make reference to the purchase of 200% RECs as an acceptable method of credit achievement. - However, the same 200% REC purchase compliance path is also outlined in the new LEED 2009 BD&C Reference Guide. - A CIR dated April 15, 2009 rules that a project that hosts a PV system, which does not use the PV and/or the PV is fully financed, owned and sold to third parties, can achieve EAc2 by purchasing a total amount of RECs equal to 100% of the system\'s annual rated energy output. Please confirm that a project pursuing EAc2 under LEED-NC v2.2 (or LEED-CSv2.0) can achieve EAc2 points by utilizing the 200% REC purchase methodology as outlined in the 2006 CIRs and 2009 BD&C Reference Guide, or the 100% REC purchase methodology outlined in the 2009 CIR. We are also seeking clarification regarding the length of time for which RECs must be purchased. The 5/16/2006 CIR states that RECs must be purchased "each year." Does this mean that RECs must be purchased each year that the system\'s RECs are sold, indefinitely? Alternatively, the 10/3/2006 CIR states that RECs must be purchased for at least ten years. Please clarify if the REC purchase is required for 10 years, or for the entire length of the utility REC purchase agreement.