In the new DR credit, it is very clear that on-site electrical generation does not count as a DR strategy. Trying to understand the reasoning behind that - I assume it's because the intent is to truly reduce energy demand (ie turn things off), not just shift it from one power generation source (the utility) to another (on-site engine-generators). Any insights?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Mark, there's more to it than that. The intent is also to make our buildings more of a responsive part of the electric grid, rather than islands. That will allow whatever demand the buildings have to be met flexibly, and hopefully with reduced need for high-carbon, inefficient peak generation capacity. LEEDuser's New Concepts in LEED v4 report has a bit more detail on this.
Our project is designed to be entirely off the grid with no electrical connection to the power grid now, or planned in the future.
Onsite PV panels generate all required electricity.
Through the CIR process we have been awarded 2 points within the DR credit.
there is a recently created LEED Interpretation (LI #10468) that allows the award of the Demand Response credit for projects that are 'off the grid' or 'net zero'. Here is the link: https://www.usgbc.org/leedaddenda/10468
Thank you.
Add new comment
To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.