See all forum discussions about NC-2009 EAp2
 Subscribe to new posts about NC-2009 EAp2 Post a new question aboutNC-2009 EAp2
See LEEDuser’s guidance on NC-2009 EAp2»
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

New LEED Requirements?

Profile picture for user cclark_2_2
Curtis Clark
Director of Sustainability Services
GSBS Architects
LEEDuser Basic Member
3 thumbs up

LEED Reviewers are implementing new requirements for the baseline building (LEED NC v2.2 EAp2 VAV System) through the comment process. In the last three reviews, I have received comments that the Fan Energy (kWh) / Fan Power (kW) should be around 3,000 hours. For a check, I simulated the "Ref Bldg Large Office New2004_v1.3_5.0" with Chicago weather file. I reset the minimum flow rate to 0.40 cfm/ft2 (0.00203 m3/s/m2). The results are 1039.43 GJ and 79047 Watts in fan energy and fan power. This calculates to 3,652.6 hours which exceeds the new requirement for a well-known reference building. To achieve this new requirement, you must reduce the minimum flow rate or turn off the fans during setback or both. It seems unreasonable. New LEED requirements should be reviewed through public process and based on scientific research. New LEED requirements should be implemented through the next publication with LEED reference guide. Or, perhaps I’m missing something…

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

Sun, 02/09/2014 - 20:56

Stating that the fan hours of use should be around 3,000 hours does not constitute a new requirement. It is quite a coincidence that it happened three times in a row however. The reviewer should be looking at the number of hours as a check for reasonableness and as a comparison to the baseline. Are the hours of use reasonable relative to the project type (i.e. the number of hours one would expect the fans to be running)? For an office open about 60 hours a week, 3,000 is a reasonable number. If your model is greater than that explain why the hours are more. No review would be denied because it is greater than 3,000 hours with any plausible explanation, especially for a few hundred hours greater than expected.

Add new comment

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