(Appologies for double posting, I posted the same question on the v4-forum. Just realized it is probably more appropriate on the v4.1 page.)
Hi everyone
We are trying to make some strategic decisions and would be happy about some feedback. First a short summary, two questions are below.
Situation is an existing office building with moderate renovations (C+S), some key points:
- nearly everywhere curtainwall facade, U-value facade around 2.4 W/(m²K) -> the facade is in good condition and will not be renovated, apart from some solar shading that must be redone
- roofs will be renovated and insulated
- cooling was provided through air with inefficient chillers -> after renovation, there will be cooled ceilings and purchased chilled water, air volume based on hygienic requirements
- heating is and remains purchased heat with radiators and floor heating
- lighting is replaced everywhere by LED
Using v4:
- The building envelope of the baseline building would be the same as the existing building, prior to renovations. As the envelope barely changes, this will provided hardly any energy savings.
- DES:
- Path 1: both baseline and proposed modelled with purchased heat and chilled water, only downstream equipment, identical utility rates, efficiency 100 % -> no energy savings
- Path 2: Baseline per Appendix G (efficiency 80%), DES virtual plant (efficiency maybe 85 %)
- Evaluation: comparison of energy costs -> depending on DES modelling path, but we don't expect high energy cost savings.
Using v4.1:
- The building envelope of the baseline building would be based on App. G in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 (Table G3.4-4), which would result in moderate savings in heating and cooling energy.
- DES:
- Evaluation:
Question 1: Would you recommend v4 or v4.1 for this project? It is rather limited information, feel free to ask follow-up questions.
Question 2: Is it correct, regarding DES modelling, that path 1 does not allow to take credit for GHG savings?
Thank you for your time!
Sarah
Tyler Thumma
7GroupLEEDuser Expert
67 thumbs up
February 17, 2022 - 12:20 pm
1) Without modeling both scenarios it is difficult to evaluate whether v4 or v4.1 will be more beneficial, as it can change from building-to-building and location-to-location due to the combination of energy cost and GHG savings in v4.1.
2) It depends what you mean by GHG savings. GHG emission factors for each energy source must always be identical between the Baseline and Proposed building models, so in that sense you never get credit for GHG savings. However, for path 1 you would still apply GHG emission factors to the purchased heat and chilled water as well as electricity, and calculate the PCI, PCIt, and percentage improvement to determine the GHG emissions points in Table 2 of the credit language.
Hope that helps!