Dear All,
I have received the following comment by the reviewer:
"The method used to report the Proposed case energy consumptions does not account for the gas consumption and electricity generation of the gas engine generator. For the Final Review, report the natural gas consumption as a negative value and electricity generation as a positive value in Section 1.7 of the form."
This is a project where on-site gas engine based electricity is used
The gas consumption was reported in Therms as reported in the eQUEST output. But it is NOT clear the intention of the comment.
If someone could throw some light on the above, appreciate very much
Thanks in advance.
regards
Anura
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
May 7, 2018 - 10:25 am
It sounds like the reviewer is trying to get the prerequisite form to correctly show the savings.
For CHP systems in the proposed model you include the gas consumption of the CHP plant associated with this project and then you subtract the electric production associated with this project. Most the more recent forms won't allow you to enter a negative number in the modeling results table so the reviewer is suggesting you enter it in the exceptional calculations area which does allow negative values.
Rahula Attalage
May 7, 2018 - 7:57 pm
Dear Marcus,
Thanks a lot for the clarification. Much appreciated.
regards
Anura
Rahula Attalage
May 13, 2018 - 8:04 pm
Dear Marcus,
This is further your related comment above.
In incorporating the CHP into Table 1.7 i.e. electricity generated as "plus" and gas used as "minus", the cost savings are reduced. Are not we, by the inclusion of CHP into the Table 1.7 as exceptional calculation, negating the benefit obtained by the waste heat use on the Absorption HVAC system in the proposed case?
Thanks in advance for your opinion.
Anura
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
May 14, 2018 - 11:58 am
That benefit should be captured within the Proposed energy modeling results. The Proposed model should include the gas consumption of the CHP and the waste heat benefit. You record the gas use as a plus (that is what the CHP is consuming) and the electric production as a minus. Sorry for the confusion here but when you enter values into the exceptional calculation a negative entry reduces savings and positive entry improves savings. So there are two ways to do this - you can include the CHP impact in your proposed model and enter the electric production only in the exceptional calculation or you can model the proposed without the CHP, entering those results in the form, then run the proposed with the CHP and enter the difference in the exceptional calculation. The latter is preferred since the reviewer can clearly see the isolated savings associated with the CHP. In this case you would enter the electric production as a savings, and you would have both negative and positive gas consumption. Be sure to account for all the differences in the results between the two models.
Rahula Attalage
May 16, 2018 - 10:22 pm
Dear Marcus,
Thanks a lot.
What is your opinion if I do the following:
1. Model the proposed case with CHP
2. include electricity generated by CHP as "plus" in the Exceptional calculations
3. include gas consumption by CHP as "minus" in Exceptional calculation
4. include gas consumption equivalent to heat used by the absorption HVAC as "plus" in the exceptional calculation
Thanks in advance.
Anura
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
May 17, 2018 - 10:34 am
That is what we would do. Make sure you provide a thorough narrative explanation for what you have done and how you did it.