We have a question about the baseline and proposed lighting for tenant spaces, and more specifically how to input those in the LEED v4 Minimum Energy Performance Calculator v05 spreadsheet.
Per the ASHRAE 90.1-2019 User's Manual, section G3.1-6, the LPD for the baseline building must be determined using either the Building Area or Space-by-Space Method. The categorization of spaces must be identical between proposed and baseline buildings. For the proposed building lighting system, if there are any areas of the building for which the lighting systems are not defined, then those areas are modeled using base interior LPDs for both the proposed and baseline runs (based on the Building Area Method). In the special case where no lighting system or design exists, as in a shell building where the lighting will be installed by a future tenant, then a default lighting power must be assumed, based on the Building Area Method for the appropriate space type. If no space type is known, then "office" is assumed.
So, for example in a high-rise core and shell building we would model the tenant office spaces under the Building Area Method, with 0.90 W/sf LPD as per Table 9.5.1. Within the same building, however, there are core spaces with the lighting system designed (lobbies and restrooms, for example). Ideally those would be classified using the Space-by-Space Method. We would therefore have a building which is using both the Building Area Method and the Space-by-Space Method. Section 9.2.2.3 allows this mix if the tenant spaces are separately metered or permitted.
If we want to complete the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator v05, lighting tab, however, we have to choose between the Building Area Method and the Space-by-Space method. The spreadsheet does not appear to accommodate for a mix of the two.
Are we allowed to use a mix of Building Area Method and Space-by-Space method? If so, how is it documented in the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator spreadsheet?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5914 thumbs up
March 11, 2019 - 2:43 pm
You cannot mix the two methods. The Building Area values do include spaces like lobbies and restrooms. It is an average over the whole of an office building not just the office portion of an office building. It is basically a simplified method for accounting for the total lighting load by counting it as the same in all spaces.
Matt Edwards
ME Engineers Inc.27 thumbs up
March 13, 2019 - 9:06 am
Thanks Marcus. In that case, if we want to take credit for lighting power reduction in tenant spaces through a tenant lease agreement, then we are forced to use the Building Area Method for the entire building? Or, would the Space-by-Space Method be acceptable? And if so do we categorize the baseline tenant office spaces as open office?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5914 thumbs up
March 15, 2019 - 4:35 pm
You have to use the same method in both models across the whole building.
We always use the space-by-space method as it will typically yield greater savings and produce a more accurate result.
Matt Edwards
ME Engineers Inc.27 thumbs up
March 18, 2019 - 9:44 am
Agreed, but the problem is that ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Table G3.1.6.c states "Where lighting neither exists nor is specified, lighting power shall be determined in accordance with the Building Area Method for the appropriate building type." And, in the User's Manual section G3.1.6, "If there are any areas of the building for which the lighting systems are not defined, then those areas are modeled using base interior LPDs for both the proposed and baseline runs (based on the Building Area Method)."
Can we say that the lighting is "specified" or "defined" via the tenant lease agreement? And we classify the baseline LPD of the tenant space in an office building under the space-by-space method as open office area, even though we are almost certain that not all of the space will be fit out as open office?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5914 thumbs up
March 18, 2019 - 3:16 pm
I stand corrected, you have to use the BAM. In order to use the SbS you would need a space layout and it sounds like one does not exist.
So I think the answers to your questions are no and no. Sorry I mislead you earlier.
Przemysław Rejczak
Energy Modeling SpecialistJW+A
11 thumbs up
March 28, 2019 - 10:29 am
So for the case that you described is it possible somehow to show savings regarding to designed lighting?
I understand that is we have undesigned spaces for future tenants we need to model BAM, in the case that tenant spaces must be modeled as BAM, because we do not know their function and layout and we can not mix BAM and SbS.
The question is if we can somehow get credit for already designed spaces? Without this I understand that we can not earn credit for lighting at all even if significant portion of lighting is already designed.
As example by specification of 2 Buildings in MEP calculator - one for teant part and second for owner and calculation LPD of owner part separately.
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5914 thumbs up
March 28, 2019 - 1:12 pm
Yes if there is a completed lighting design for a tenant space you can claim savings.