FAQs about EAp2 :

Our project has a large process load—75%. Despite our efforts to make an efficient HVAC design, the cost savings are minimal. What can we do to earn this prerequisite and be eligible for LEED certification? Is there any flexibility in how we model the p

Can SHGC be higher in the proposed than in the baseline model?

Our process load is higher than 25%. Do we have to justify that?

Do I need to justify the electrical and fuel rates I am using in my model?

Our local code references ASHRAE 90.1-2010. Should I use that for my documentation, or 90.1-2007?

Can I claim exterior lighting savings for canopy lighting even though a baseline model cannot include shading elements?

The project is built on a site with existing exterior lighting installed. How should this be accounted for?

Can mezzanines open to floors below be excluded from the energy model?

How do I provide a zip code for an international location?

For a project outside the U.S., how do I determine the climate zone?

For a project outside the U.S., how do I determine the Target Finder score?

Do hotel rooms need automatic light shut-off control?

How commonly are the 90.1 mandatory compliance forms submitted as part of EAp2/EAc1?

The Section 9 space-by-space method does not include residential space types. What should I use?

Can the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP) be used to energy model for LEED?

Is it acceptable to model a split-type AC with inverter technology compressor as a heat pump, like modeling VRF?

Can the Trace 700 'LEED Energy Performance Summary Report' by uploaded to LEED Online in lieu of the Section 1.4 tables spreadsheet?

A portion of our building envelope is historic. Can we exclude it from our model?

Which baseline HVAC system do I use if my building has no heating or air conditioning?

For an existing building, do I need to rotate the model?

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-2009 EAp2:Minimum Energy Performance

Lighting Power Density

Hi, im working in the design of a petrol station persuing LEED certification. When trying to assignate the LPD for the loading area with the petrol pumps, i couldn´t decide wich equivalent Building Area type was the appropiate. My guesses are the following: 1. Maybe the power is excempt by point 9.4.5 Exception "g" (transportation sites). 2. Sales Area (table 9.6.1) 20 W/m2. ( 3. Retail Area (table 9.6.1) 18 W/m2 + Accent lighting. 4. Other? For security reasons the area must comply with minimun lighting intensity (over 500 lux). Wich path should i use? Thanks.

2

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

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

Go premium for $15.95  »

Fri, 04/01/2011 - 21:40

So are these lights interior or exterior? If they are outside then refer to Table 9.4.5. If you are talking about the petrol pumping area where cars pull in to fill their fuel tanks then it sounds like exterior lighting and falls under the Canopies and Overhangs in Table 9.4.5. Not sure but it does not sound as if 9.4.5g applies. If they are inside then you can use either Section 9.5 or 9.6.

Fri, 04/08/2011 - 20:44

Hi Marcus, thanks for the reply. You are right, I was talking about the exterior pumping area. I addopted the Canopies and Overhangs category for the area but the lighting power installed is by far greater than the allowed. It seems to me that this kind of area should have an additional LPD allowance since is more critical than a simple overhang space. It´s possible to include the "Drive-through" additional LPD allowance in each pumping island? I also have some trouble determining the appropiate category for these two zones: 1- Exterior dinning areas, adyacent to the building indoor restaurant (some with overhangs and others without). 2- The Petrolstation has a minimarket and a fastfood zone. The facade of the area is 100% glassed due to owners commercial requirements. Should i use the facade 16.4 W/l additional LPD of table 9.4.5 + Building entrances and exits? Or could we use the Outdoor sales category which gives the possibilty of 66 W/l? Thanks.

Fri, 04/08/2011 - 21:55

No I do not think it is appropriate to add the drive-through allowance in the pumping island. The drive through is also a non-tradable surface and cannot be traded in any case. There is a 5% unrestricted allowance contained in 9.4.5 which gets applied to the total. The canopies are a tradable surface meaning you can be over in one area as long as you are under in another and the two at least offset. Exterior dining does not appear to be covered by 90.1 and therefore should be modeled identically in both model based on the proposed building design. The composition of the walls does not enter into the lighting calculations. If it is exterior lighting is illuminating the exterior walls then it is facade lighting. Outdoor sales may be appropriate if the lighting is used primarily to light merchandise outside the building. In our experience the exterior lighting power allowances in 90.1 are more than generous and projects like you describe should be able to meet the requirements. Keep in mind that if the project wants to get LEED certification the exterior lighting provisions are a mandatory provision of 90.1 and as such if not met then the project can't be LEED certified. So rather than seeking provisions which would allow you to have greater exterior lighting power I'd suggest focusing effort on making changes to your design and the assumptions behind it in order to go beyond mere compliance. It can be done! Start with the 500 lux requirement - in my experience this level is far more than would be needed for the security of anything. This is the amount I need to sit down and read a newspaper, not to visualize a potential security threat. Table 17-20 in the IESNA Lighting handbook, 9th Edition contains recommended levels for petrol stations. The maximum value is 100 lux for pump areas in light surroundings. Reducing the assumed illuminance value by 5 to 10 times would be a good start.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 10:16

The level of light for security is an undefined metric ? You may wish to look at the International Dark-Sky Association's website - they have a document on "Light pollution and saftey", and other documents on energy. While they don't give lux levels they say "Let’s Have Real Security, Not Just Bad Lighting" and then argue for appropriate design. Are you wanting 500 Lux for the cameras to track money transactions, or because of saftey issues when filling the cars ? Some clients think that high lux levels sell more product ...

Mon, 05/02/2011 - 22:53

Marcus, Mike: Thanks for the reply. The client has his own minimum lighting levels stablished for all the petrol stations. I guess, the clue is to make him realise that this levels are too high. Thanks

Add new comment

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