Our project is a new university campus building that is served by a central campus heating plant. The plant is comprised of biomass fueled boilers providing steam. However, the campus is considering a switch to fossil fuel as an alternative to biomass. Our question is two-fold: 1) We would like to confirm that it is appropriate to use the USGBC Combined Heat & Power (CHP) Reference Guide as a guidance document for the central heating plant, despite the fact that we are not generating electricity at the plant. 2) We would like to confirm that biomass feedstock used in a campus district heating facility would be considered free energy under EAc1.
An existing campus central plant fueled by biomass is used to supply heat to a new construction project. The project team is asking whether the USGBC CHP White Paper applies to central plants that are not generating power at the plant; and whether biomass feedstock used in a central plant facility would be considered free energy under EAc1. The USGBC CHP White Paper applies only to LEED v. 2.2 projects using combined heat and power. The USGBC is in the process of preparing a document describing the v2.2 modeling protocol for individual buildings serviced by a central plant without Combined Heat & Power. If the project would like to reflect performance improvements achieved from the central plant, they may apply the modeling methodologies described in this document (which will be available some time after January 2007). In the district energy document biomass is considered a non-traditional energy source and it is planned to base its cost on its carbon content versus the traditional fuel (it will likely not be free). If the project is completing documentation prior to the release of this document, then the both the Proposed and Baseline buildings should be modeled using the same purchased energy rates. If purchased energy rates are used, documentation should be provided justifying how these rates were determined. Applicable Internationally.