See all forum discussions about CI-v4 EAp2
 Subscribe to new posts about CI-v4 EAp2 Post a new question aboutCI-v4 EAp2
See LEEDuser’s guidance on CI-v4 EAp2»
FAQs about EAp2 :

Do the required savings for this prerequisite (and credit) need to come only from building energy, or also process loads?

Our project doesn't have enough energy savings to earn the prerequisite. Can we get there by incorporating onsite renewables?

Does the base building information need to be included in the minimum energy performance calculator, or is it sufficient to just include the tenant space?

Are there any exceptions to the daylight control requirement of ASHRAE 90.1–2010?

Our proposed design has insulation R-values that are below those prescribed by ASHRAE 90.1-2010. Can we still meet the prerequisite?

View answers »

Forum discussion

CI-v4 EAp2:Minimum energy performance

AEDG 50% FOR GROCERY STORES

I'm designing a grocery store.  I have reviewed chapter 5 of the 50% AEDG for grocery stores and found that I can use the SZVAV DX with DOAS (HV6). The guide states that I should meet or exceed the efficiency levels in table 5-16. I have a 26 ton RTU (312 Mbh) which is large than the highest listed with an efficiency 240 Mbh. The table just says "not recommended" if >240 Mbh. In the Climate zone 4 recommendation for my SZVAV DX Package RTU with DOAS there is also a maximum external static pressure listed a 0.7 in w.g.

Will this large (312 Mbh) system be acceptable for the prerequisite? Will I be able to get any additional points in Eac2 if I don't reduce the size and provide two separate systems under the 20 ton (240 Mbh) size limit? With the larger RTU I also have designed 1.0 in w.g., is this and issue? The not recommended is ambiguous

0
Post a reply

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Profile picture for user sheffer
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow
7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
4454 thumbs up

Wed, 12/27/2017 - 18:14

All of the items in the tables of these guides are recommendations for acheiving the 50% savings. LEED requires that you meet every one of the items within these tables to demonstrate credit compliance. So "not recommended" means it is not allowed. Both of the issues you raise means that you would not be in compliance and can't meet the requirements for the HVAC related points.

Sun, 12/31/2017 - 05:44

This would mean that I could still comply with the 50% savings just not get any points toward the HVAC related right? It doesn't mean I don't comply with a prerequisite? I've always done energy modeling in the past and don't want a surprise late in the project.      
Profile picture for user sheffer
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow
7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
4454 thumbs up

Tue, 01/02/2018 - 18:10

I was thinking LEED BD+C 2009 when I replied before, sorry for the confusion. The AEDGs are not an option to demonstrate prerequisite compliance in CI-v4. if you are not doing an energy model then the other option is 90.1 compliance with the mandatory provisions and some reductions in energy use for lighting and plug loads.

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.