in EA P2, it's written to comply with mandatory provisions which are for example 5.4 which is related to Building envelope under Option 1. But in EA C1, under Option 1, building envelope section shown is Section 5. Question is do we have to go only for option 5.4 in both above mentioned prerequisite and credit, or have to use 5.4 for EA P2 and all the section 5 for EA C1 for the building envelope.
The client is demanding to use latest codes for the LEED Health Care 2009, but the requirement for the above mentioned prerequisite/ credit is ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA standard 90.1-2007. Can we use ASHRAE 2010 under LEED 2009. Thanks
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
March 2, 2013 - 2:01 pm
You must comply with the mandatory provisions, X.4 of each section. The prescriptive requirements are optional in that you do not have to meet them as long as you are able to show sufficient savings.
You could use 2010 for a LEED 2009 project but you will not be able to generate the same amount of savings. So why not comply with 2010 for the building design and then create a baseline using 2007.
BABAR MEHMOOD
SAUD CONSULT3 thumbs up
March 3, 2013 - 12:19 pm
Thanks for the clarification Jeff. One more thing, for the baseline the requirements are clearly written in the ASHRAE 2010. But is there any solution to check the proposed requirements are enough to get approximately 15 points under EAC1 before using the energy model software since we are looking for such modeller. In the mean time we want to check approximately on our own without using any software for the proposed design case. Thanks,
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
March 3, 2013 - 1:02 pm
Some folks with considerable experience might be able to very, very roughly estimate the percent improvement possible. It would be only an educated guess. Without doing the modeling it would not be possible to know for sure however.
If 15 points is your target then the purpose of energy modeling is to test the capacity of the proposed design to deliver this level of savings and if not to identify opportunities to increase the savings. Keep in mind as well that energy modeling results are only as good as the assumptions regarding the modeling inputs.
Who is Jeff by the way? :-)
Scott Bowman
LEED FellowIntegrated Design + Energy Advisors, LLC
LEEDuser Expert
519 thumbs up
March 4, 2013 - 10:49 am
Energy modeling done early can help you identify the ways to reach the goals you set. You could get somewhat of a read on the efficiency you might expect by reviewing the Advanced Energy Design Guides published by ASHRAE and referenced by LEED. The 50% guides would especially give you some idea of those systems and techniques that yield the best results for their building types. Note that those guides are measured against ASHRAE 90.1-2007, or the requirements of v2009.
BABAR MEHMOOD
SAUD CONSULT3 thumbs up
March 17, 2013 - 8:28 am
Thank you for the guidance. What i really got the idea that by using the ASHRAE standard 90.1 2007 for the base line and 2010 version for the proposed design will going to give me better results but in order to achieve the required target, still I have to rethink for the information for the proposed design by revising the design values like for example if by providing insulation values 50mm and getting 20% energy savings than the baseline, and have to ahieve the tearget of 24%, I would probably change the insulation thickness to 100 mm and might be achieving better results or more than that. This means it would be like inputing and revising the data for the desired 24% target until i achieved one. (Sorry Marcus for the "Jeff thing").
Scott Bowman
LEED FellowIntegrated Design + Energy Advisors, LLC
LEEDuser Expert
519 thumbs up
March 19, 2013 - 11:03 am
We actually made a proposal to USGBC for GreenBuild to investigate the differences in baselines and what systems might be required to maintain savings over the three codes that are referenced starting with v2.2 to v2009 and ending with v4. We have not heard if we are accepted yet, but we are hopeful.
I would adjust the way you are thinking about this. You should run a baseline for 2007 AND 2010…you have two goals you want to reach, one for LEED, and one for code compliance. Then start your as-designed model and create different options you want to investigate. Having four or five options to evaluate helps you to then refine and define against your goals; balance performance, efficiency, and cost. Looking at the life cycle of the options is also very good idea.
Start with envelope options, as they are as near as permanent in our world, then move onto efficiency through system selection, equipment selection, or sequence options you may have. Last, evaluate adding renewable energy to make a high performance building use less energy.