See all forum discussions about NC-v4 EAp2
 Subscribe to new posts about NC-v4 EAp2 Post a new question aboutNC-v4 EAp2
See LEEDuser’s guidance on NC-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?

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

NC-v4 EAp2:Minimum energy performance

ny exception for the minimum 5% energy cost saving before renewable energy

Default Avatar
Moses Chong
Mechanical Engineer
WSP
LEEDuser Basic Member
2 thumbs up

I have a project with 2 building in LEED V4. One building is saving 14% and one building is only saving 0.05%, overall saving is 10.6%. The building with 0.05% saving actually have renewable energy that covers all of its energy, but the reviewer still want me to demonstrate the minimum 5% before the renewable energy. Has anyone able to create an exception of this requirement? 

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

Thu, 01/11/2024 - 19:13

Not that I am aware of. There is a definitive requirement to show enough savings in v4 to meet the prerequisite without renewables. This changed in v4.1 so perhaps you could meet the prerequsite under that version of LEED.

Thu, 01/11/2024 - 20:48

Moses, Are you sure the modeling has been done correctly?  I imagine efficiencies for equipment on the market today are significatnly better than ASHRAE's 2010's minimum efficiencies that combined with all LED lighting (always cost effective) should get you well over 5% compared to 2010 for most buildings.  If not, I assume you must have some very large process loads, maybe there's a way for credit to be given for a reduction in the process load.  If not, I believe Marcus' solution to submit under v4.1 would allow savings from using renewables to count toward the prerequisite.
Default Avatar
Moses Chong
Mechanical Engineer
WSP
LEEDuser Basic Member
2 thumbs up

Thu, 01/11/2024 - 21:29

It's a small training facility with high process energy, and high ventilation rate compare to 62.1. The team wants the increased ventilation credit so i have to model 62.1 minimum ventilation in the baseline. The baseline system is PTHP which is the same as our proposed design. 

Fri, 01/12/2024 - 18:33

Okay, probably makes sense to pursue the pre-requisite and energy optimization credit under LEED v4.1 then.

Add new comment

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