I have another question related to my last one regarding M&V and the energy model. In response to my last question, Marcus clarified that the energy model for a C&S building needs to be based on a fully occupied building, regardless of occupancy at the time of initial completion. He also mentioned that doing the IPMVP M&V would be difficult for my scenario which is initially an unoccupied building.
So am I correct to assume that for EAc5.1, options 1 and 2 which are based on the IPMVP are intended only for C&S buildings where all the tenant spaces will be built-out at the time of completion?
Or, would at least knowing the number of tenants and their location in the building be a situation appropriate for options 1 or 2? I am wondering because there is another potential project that is similar to the one I was originally asking about, but for this one the tenant spaces are at least delineated and one will be built-out at the time of C&S completion. Would EAc5.1 options 1 and 2 be appropriate for this building?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5907 thumbs up
March 5, 2012 - 12:07 pm
The simple answer to your question is no. It can apply. In many cases there may be enough information to do M&V. Based on your previous post I am assuming that there is no core space in your cold, dark shell. If there was a core space separately metered you could document savings in that area. Envelope savings would likely require you to revise your model based on fitted out spaces so you have billing data to calibrate to. As you point out the problem will be getting billing data that matches the model in the calibration process. You could write your M&V Plan to include a revision to your original model that you can then calibrate to but this would add considerable complexity and time.
It is not that you can't do it. You can will just be very hard.
The more that is known about the building occupancy the less model revision you would need to do to perform the calibration.
Tony Schafer
24 thumbs up
March 5, 2012 - 12:32 pm
Thanks Marcus - again very helpful