The Reviewers have already told us that the District Energy System we are using, a utility-owned plant which generates grid electricity and heats hot water for our building from landfill gas, is allowed as on-site renewable energy and will be allowed to use Option 2 of the DES. We will use the same cost structure for baseline and proposed models. We are struggling with the cost for the heating hot water.
The primary purpose of these generators is to make grid electricity. Heating hot water is an extra perk. (The reviewers didn't buy that the heating hot water was "free" - it has to have a cost) Landfill gas is unmetered, so it is not clear how much is used. Heating hot water is also unmetered, so it is not clear how much is generated. We know, however, that the electricity produced costs the utility $49 per megawatt-hour. We have a very clear idea of pumping energy costs and distribution losses, so it is just the cost of the hot water at the generator that is puzzling.
$49 per MWHr can give us a good idea of the total operating cost of this DES plant, a number which includes fuel and maintenance. We've asserted that the cost-per-BTU for our heating hot water should be about the same as the cost-per-BTU for the generated electricity. This is being challenged.
We can calculate from the peak capacity of the equipment, that 11% of the output of the generator becomes hot water, 31% of the output becomes electricity, and the rest goes up the stack as waste heat. This is the closest we can come to ratioing the outputs. But how do we prorate costs?
Is it valid to say that the cost per btu of the electricity and hot water is about equal? Or is there a valid way to prorate these outputs given that we know the cost of one of them, but the actual fuel cost is not known?
Christopher Schaffner
CEO & FounderThe Green Engineer
LEEDuser Expert
963 thumbs up
December 17, 2015 - 6:56 pm
I'm confused by the reviewer's response, or maybe I don't understand the question.
If all the energy serving the building comes from the DES, and if the DES is 100% renewable, then why do you care about the cost? It's 100% renewable, you get all the points.
What am I missing here?
Lawrence Lile
Chief EngineerLile Engineering, LLC
76 thumbs up
December 17, 2015 - 8:42 pm
In EA p2 the energy model must include costs for district energy, identical rate structures for both baseline and proposed energy. The output of the energy model compares the costs of proposed building versus baseline building. Although it might seem that on-site renewable energy is "zero" cost, that doesn't take into account capital, maintenance, pumping energy, and fuel. Even landfill gas has a "cost" associated to get it from the garbage heap to the generator. The LEED reveiwer won't let us count the cost of a fuel as "zero" under EAp1 even if we made it out of trash!
Lawrence Lile
Chief EngineerLile Engineering, LLC
76 thumbs up
December 17, 2015 - 8:39 pm
I've found a scholarly paper on the subject: "Marginal Cost of Steam and Power from Cogeneration Systems using a Rational Value-Allocation Procedure" Authors: Jimmy D Kumana, Majid M Al-Gwaiz Proceedings from the Twenty Sixth Industrial Energy Technology Conference, Houston TX April 20-23, 2004
http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/6042/ESL-IE-04-...
The paper is pretty short, and was pretty easy to follow with a spreadsheet. Although the authors analyze a steam and electric cogeneration plant, the principle is the same for water-and-electric cogeneration.
With this methodology I came out with a cost of $2.36 per therm for my DES hot water. Their methodology rationally allocates the cost inputs and material inputs to the resulting energy outputs.
Jean Marais
b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert832 thumbs up
December 18, 2015 - 4:33 am
If you were to compare it to other companies selling elec and district heat, does the elec price compare? What do they charge for the heat? Perhaps this way you could figure out how much "for free" is costing.
Christopher Schaffner
CEO & FounderThe Green Engineer
LEEDuser Expert
963 thumbs up
December 18, 2015 - 9:33 am
Still don't understand. Calculate the cost all you want. At the end, you'll subtract the entire cost, so the bottom line is still zero.
Cost is just a way to measure energy use. LEED doesn't actually care how much you pay your facilities staff.
Another option would be to follow this Pilot ACP and use a different metric. http://www.usgbc.org/node/7489409?return=/pilotcredits/New-Construction/...
If you follow the source energy or GHG option, you'll still end up at zero.
Haojie Wang
Energy ModelerKJWW Engineering
4 thumbs up
December 18, 2015 - 10:43 am
I don't think you need to include capital cost or maitainace cost in EAc1. What you need is the source energy cost to generate electricity/district energy. In your case, for proposed design, you cost will be the landfill gas. The baseline cost will be the local utility rate. If landfill gas is free and the reviewer agrees with you, then your energy cost is 0 if the whole building energy is supplied through the landfill generated electricity and hot water
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5906 thumbs up
December 18, 2015 - 12:18 pm
Sounds like the facility is using grid electricity not associated with this plant since the plant feeds the grid? If so that is a separate rate not impacted by the DES.
This situation is not clear in the DESv2 in terms of what to do when the fuel source is "free". It says that you use the same cost in the baseline and proposed. So if they are both zero then no savings.
The hot water in Appendix D of the DESv2 would have a cost and the electricity, as a by-product of the process, is considered free. This is the opposite of your situation but what the DES indicates should be done.
The Reference Guide confirms the the capital and maintenance costs should not be included in the fuel cost.
So we would highly recommend that you contact GBCI and have a conversation with the technical review team to resolve this issue and seek definitive guidance before resubmitting.
Francesco Passerini
engineer90 thumbs up
December 23, 2015 - 12:55 pm
I'm looking table 4 of "Treatment of District or Campus Thermal Energy in LEED
V2 and LEED 2009 – Design & Construction".
It says that for the baseline model you shall consider "On-site heating plant or fossil fuel furnaces". If you model "fossil fuel" in the baseline and landfill gas in the design, you'll get an advantage.
Is this approach correct?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5906 thumbs up
December 28, 2015 - 11:26 am
All this means is that the baseline system is selected from Tables G3.1.1A. It does not mean that the fuel source is necessarily different. See Section 2.4.2.2 for how you apply rates to the models. This refers to Appendix G which indicates you need to model the same fuels in both models.
The Scandinavian DES guidance which can be used on projects in Europe does allow a comparison to fuel oil as the baseline fuel.
Azra
8 thumbs up
October 25, 2023 - 8:14 am
Hello, long time since this was a subject but how would we apply this in v4?
Let's say DES delivers up to 50% renewable energy to the project.
I was advised to look into path 2 or 3 to model the DES in the prerequisite, then credit "Renewable Energy Production" under Project type variations-DES to calculate the offset.
Am I then going into SImulation with the "offseted" prices to get my % of improvement in e.performance? We are contacting LEED coach as well, just wanted some input from first hand experience :)
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5906 thumbs up
October 25, 2023 - 10:19 am
Hi Azra could you please post your question in the corresponding v4 forum since it is a v4 question?