High Process Load endangers certification?

That's not quite true - you don't have to use the default percentage for process energy. Use the actual. But you do need to demonstrate at least a 10% reduction of your total energy costs, which is largely from your process loads.

The challenge we've found with industrial facilities is defining that baseline. In some cases, you may have a similar facility you can use as a baseline, and show how the new process is able to save energy cost over the older one. You'll need to document all the energy consuming parts of the baseline and proposed process.

If there's not an existing baseline process for comparison, it has been acceptable to create a theoretical baseline for the process load that shows credible calculations of all the component energy uses.

EEMs in the design case could come from strategies such as premium efficiency motors or pumps, heat recovery, or process innovations that reduce the energy consumption per unit of production. Showing energy reduction per unit isn't enough by itself, though, per this version 2.2 CIR:

Ruling 2/9/09
The applicant is proposing an alternative compliance path for a process dominated snack manufacturing plant. The proposed approach appears to be reasonable. The applicant should note however, that to pursue credits under EA credit 1 all calculations must be converted to total energy cost (of natural gas and electricity consumed). While the energy per pound of product may be a metric for efficiency, it does not qualify for points calculations. The applicant must also provide the following information at a minimum to gain the points:

1. Detailed narrative description of the processes taken credit for
2. Detailed narrative and back up data for determining the baseline energy consumption
3. Narratives and cutsheets of the proposed new equipment clearly highlighting the efficiency metric for each piece of equipment credit is claimed for.

Remember, old CIR's may not be accepted, but in some situations they may give some initial clues as to how to proceed.

Just curious - what happens if your factory equipment is in an unconditioned part of the building ?

Also interesting to note is the approach taken by the Indian GBC ( who have largely adopted LEED ). They have a specific standard for Factories and they say "All the process loads are to be factored in both the base and proposed case. However, process loads can be excluded while reporting the building energy savings"

I am sure i saw this mentioned in relation to the old LEED too ?

Surely LEED 2009 is about the actual building and not about the factory equipment ?

LEED is about both.

If the unconditioned part of the building is part of your LEED scope then the factory equipment counts as well. Doesn't matter if the space is unconditioned or not.

The post-processing of modeling results to exclude non-regulated energy loads was a part of the LEED process for v2.0/2.1 which referenced Section 11 of ASHRAE 90.1-1999. Once Appendix G was developed the Section 11 models were largely abandoned. The purpose of a Section 11 model is to demonstrate code compliance. The purpose of Appendix G is demonstrate overall energy savings.

LEED is about both the building and what is houses. After all what the building contains is why the building was built in the first place. In addition, the environmental impacts of a kWh used for conveyance and a kWh used for lighting are identical and we need to do what we can to address both. So since v2.2 LEED is about "all the energy costs within and associated with the building project" as stated in the credit requirements.

Marcus,

Could this mean that the USGBC will provide some methodology to help understand the baseline for a particular industrial process ?

Our concern is how to calculate a baseline for the various processes in our factory. We know for certain we have more efficient equipment, but the quantum is not clear.

Off the top of my head, is there some way to work though a M&V process to produce the details on energy use avoided ( ie savings )

As the former Chair of the EA TAG I pushed for USGBC to provide additional guidance but so far I don't think there has been any action on that front. You could lobby Chris Shaffner, as he is the current Chair of the EA TAG!

The savings are all about the baselines. Establish the baseline and the savings can be calculated. The only way to get feedback on your industrial process baselines right now is to submit a project specific CIR.