Forum discussion
NC-2009 EAp2: Minimum Energy Performance
Has anyone ever experienced process load lower than 25%? We are working on a museum currently having process energy cost equal to 16% of the total baseline energy cost. We could try to increase this figure by increasing more process load (kW) however, this may not reflect the reality. Any syggestions?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium forTo post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.
A portion of our building envelope is historic. Can we exclude it from our model?
For an existing building, do I need to rotate the model?
Our process load is higher than 25%. Do we have to justify that?
Our local code references ASHRAE 90.1-2010. Should I use that for my documentation, or 90.1-2007?
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?
Which baseline HVAC system do I use if my building has no heating or air conditioning?
Our project has a diesel backup generator. Should we include it in our energy model?
Can SHGC be higher in the proposed than in the baseline model?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
July 2, 2014 - 10:05 am
It happens all the time for many building types. A museum makes sense.
You are supposed to model the process energy as accurately as you can. If it is over 25% do nothing. If it is under 25% provide an explanation for how you modeled the process loads and why they are under 25%.
Never arbitrarily add made up process loads to get to 25%.
Charalampos Giannikopoulos
Senior Sustainability ConsultantDCarbon
84 thumbs up
July 2, 2014 - 10:30 am
Thank you Marcus! This is exactly our dilemma. Either to leave the process energy cost as it is (16% of the total energy cost) or to increase it deliberately until it reaches 25%. But in the first scenario would the Reviewer accept a statement about the decreased process energy cost or would they come up with a comment requesting increase in process energy cost and accordingly process load? Unfortunately, a museum is not a typical building and not much information is available about process load in such buildings.
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
July 2, 2014 - 10:38 am
The reviewer would not comment on a 16% process cost if you thoroughly explain how you derived it and justify why it is low.
If your statement and the information you provide is incomplete then yes you may get a comment.
In the case of a museum (assuming the items on display do not use any energy) the process loads throughout the public spaces could be very low. Part of your explanation could be that the public area is large and the load is low so the W/sf you modeled is low. Agree that there is not much information on the W/sf for a museum so you will have to work with the owner to identify the loads to be installed and model them as best you can instead of using some default value.