Forum discussion

EBOM-v4 EAp2:Minimum energy performance

"Case 2, Option 2: Benchmarking against Historical Data"

We like to seek for an advice for EAp2: Minimum Energy Performance, we are pursuing "Case 2, Option 2: Benchmarking against Historical Data" our quarries are listed below:

 

Declaration of historical year

The declared performance period of the project is from June 1, 2023 up to May 31 2024, with an establishment period of February 2023 up to May 2023. Our question is in terms of the historical year which of this approach should we consider

 

OPTION 1:

Year 1: January 1, 2020 – December 31, 2020

Year 2: January 1, 2021 – December 31, 2021

Year 3: January 1, 2022 – December 31, 2022 

 

OPTION 2:

Year 1: June 1, 2020 – May 31, 2023

Year 2: June 1, 2021 – May 31, 2022

Year 3: June 1, 2022 – May 31, 2023

 

Which of the two options should we consider to finalize the calculations?

 

HISTORICAL DATA

In line with our quarries in item no.1 which of the two options mentioned above should we consider in determining the historical annual production output.

 

 

ANNUAL PRODUCTION OUTPUT

Our project is using a group approach composed of two separate production building, Building 5 & Building 6. The project has a data for their annual production output but this data is combined for both building or should we break down for accurate computation for annual weather-normalized source energy use intensity

 

ELECTRIC METER READING (ENERGY BILLING)

The electric utility provider conducts its meter reading every 25th of the month, and the billing period (e.g. the billing period is from 25-July 2023 to 24-August 2023, and the billing date is 26-August 2023). Can we consider the data for the metering for this period for the month of August 2023?

0

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

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

Go premium for $15.95  »

Mon, 10/16/2023 - 17:41

both options are allowed, since they both include three contigous years within the previous 5 years. I was involved with this approach on a v3 EB project in Russia: https://www.usgbc.org/projects/mars-petcare-0 each building is required to demonstrate compliance with the prereq but can use a weighted average for the credit.  Aug 25th can be considered "Aug". I would highly recommend scheduling a call with GBCI to discuss your approach, they were very helpful when I was involved with factory projects going through LEED EB.  Good Luck!

Add new comment

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