CS-2009 EAc2: On-Site Renewable Energy 4 points

We would like to confirm the applicability of a District Lake Source Cooling (LSC) operation as an eligible on-site renewable energy source for LEED NC 2009 and LEED v4 BD+C. This innovative Lake Source Cooling facility, which has been in operation since 2000, uses the deep cold waters of a large lake as a non-contact renewable cooling source for a campus chilled water system. At a depth of ~250ft the bottom of the lake maintains a steady year-round temperature of 39-41 F. The only energy used in the system is pumping energy and the system has demonstrated an 86% reduction in energy use over conventional water cooled chiller. Extensive environmental impact studies were carried out prior to and after operation and all have concluded that adverse environmental impacts have been minimized or avoided. It does not use any vapor compression cycle and no water is wasted.

The LEED 2009 Reference Guide states "geothermal energy systems using deep-earth water or steam sources (but not vapor compression systems for heat transfer) may be eligible for this credit." The project team proposes to account for the renewable energy credit by calculating savings between the proposed case model with LSC system and a proposed case model with conventional refrigeration system that complies with the ASHRAE 90.1 code requirements.

Our project is installing a photovoltaic system that will be directly connected to the building\'s energy system, and which will be net-metered with the utility grid. The system is being financed through a power purchase agreement, which requires selling of the RECs to the public utility. A number of Credit Interpretation Rulings have been issued regarding the conditions which must be met for a project to qualify for renewable energy credits under EAc2. These CIRs seem to provide conflicting language. We are seeking clarification regarding these conditions for LEED-NCv2.2 and LEED-CSv2.0 projects. - CIRs dated 10/3/2006 and 5/16/2006 state that the sale of RECs is allowed from an on-site renewable energy system that claims credit under EAc2 if the building owner or energy system owner purchases a total amount of RECs equal to 200% of the system\'s annual rated energy output each year from another source, which must be Green-e eligible. Per the CIRs, the seller of the on-site RECs must also follow all established guidelines for the sale of RECs and not claim any of the environmental attributes for the on-site system. - An administrative ruling dated 7/19/2007, which updates conditions for on-site renewable systems to achieve EAc2 points, does not make reference to the purchase of 200% RECs as an acceptable method of credit achievement. - However, the same 200% REC purchase compliance path is also outlined in the new LEED 2009 BD&C Reference Guide. - A CIR dated April 15, 2009 rules that a project that hosts a PV system, which does not use the PV and/or the PV is fully financed, owned and sold to third parties, can achieve EAc2 by purchasing a total amount of RECs equal to 100% of the system\'s annual rated energy output. Please confirm that a project pursuing EAc2 under LEED-NC v2.2 (or LEED-CSv2.0) can achieve EAc2 points by utilizing the 200% REC purchase methodology as outlined in the 2006 CIRs and 2009 BD&C Reference Guide, or the 100% REC purchase methodology outlined in the 2009 CIR. We are also seeking clarification regarding the length of time for which RECs must be purchased. The 5/16/2006 CIR states that RECs must be purchased "each year." Does this mean that RECs must be purchased each year that the system\'s RECs are sold, indefinitely? Alternatively, the 10/3/2006 CIR states that RECs must be purchased for at least ten years. Please clarify if the REC purchase is required for 10 years, or for the entire length of the utility REC purchase agreement.

Question: Are perforated metal wall solar air heating systems eligible for credit under LEED CS EAc2?" Background: The intent of the credit is to "encourage and recognize increasing levels of on-site renewable energy self-supply in order to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use." "Renewable Energy Systems Eligible for EA Credit 2", "Solar Thermal Systems" (p. 224) states "Active solar thermal energy systems that employ collection panels; heat transfer mechanical components such as pumps or fans, and a defined heat storage system, such as a hot water tank are eligible for this credit." "Systems Not Eligible for EA Credit 2" (p. 224) states excludes "architectural passive solar and daylighting strategies provide savings that are chiefly efficiency related". Perforated metal wall solar air heating systems include a collector panel (the wall) and a heat transfer mechanical component (fan or fans) but typically do not include a defined thermal storage component. Natural Resources Canada considers these to be active systems ("Total energy savings result from four different mechanisms: [including] active solar heating of ventilation air" http://www.canren.gc.ca/renew_ene/index.asp?CaID=50&PgID=347)

Can the definition of renewable energy sources be modified to include all clean urban wood waste, invasive species, habitat restoration programs, clean industrial wood waste (pallets), and tree tops left over from logging operations?

To encourage increasing levels of on-site renewable energy while recognizing that facilities with high process loads may not have the physical space available to install enough renewable energy equipment to meet the current LEED point thresholds, the following path is available for buildings where more than 60% of the estimated annual proposed building energy consumption comes from non-regulated loads.

Our community college campus includes an existing 1.06mW solar field that backfeeds two existing metered services. Additional metered services on the campus are serviced by the utility company campus \'loop\', but are not fed directly by the solar array. The solar array currently accounts for 25% of power provided to the existing campus (documentation available). Two new buildings are under construction on campus. Building A is a new 60,000 s.f., 3-story Office and Administration building, which is fed by one of the two metered electrical services tied directly to the solar array. Building B is a 77,000 s.f., two-story Fine Arts facility, which will require a new metered service from the utility company campus \'loop\', but are not fed directly by the solar array. A CIR Ruling dated 08/13/2007 implies that an existing PV array may be applied to new construction on a campus, therefore we would like to pursue EA credit #2 for both projects. Our intent is to provide documentation to express the anticipated annual energy use of each new building as a percentage of the overall energy use on campus, and to apply the same percentage of the power generated by the solar array towards this credit.

Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) is using a high quality wood-burning masonry heater to provide about 10% of its building\'s annual energy budget, directly as heat. Remaining heat is provided by an oil-fired hydronic system, supplemented by solar thermal collectors. We are requesting approval of this masonry heater as a renewable heat source for both EA-1x Energy Optimization and EA-2.3 Renewable Energy on the following grounds: The masonry heater serves as an element of research, training and demonstration for clean and renewable wood heat. The masonry heater is used and managed as part of CCHRC\'s research mission and building operations. It is monitored regularly for temperature, weight of wood input and weight of ash output. The masonry heater is fueled once per business day when heating is required. It provides significant heat for the 2 story east end of the building from its location near an open stairway in the building\'s lobby. Wood used at this facility is sustainably harvested in local woodland and grounds management. Firewood is supplied by CCHRC\'s land owner, University of Alaska Fairbanks, from its maintenance and construction clearing operations. In addition, firewood may be cut on nearby designated, managed State land areas after a permit is obtained: http://forestry.alaska.gov/wood/firewood.html Plentiful, regulated forest land areas near this site make firewood a renewable, local energy source which will be available for the life of the building. The standard \'Envirotech\' masonry heater core ( http://www.timelyconstruction.com/index.htm ) has been tested for particulate emissions by Myren Consulting, Inc., an accredited third party testing agency. Average particulate grams per kg. of wood: ASTM Standard Crib Fuel; 0.8193 g/kg., Cord wood: 0.8155 g/kg. These values meet or exceed those for allowable wood pellet stoves, relieving concerns that incomplete or poor combustion can produce pollution; expressed on page 154 of the Version 2.1 Reference Guide. Masonry heaters also have a burn-efficiency similar to that of oil-fired boilers. Most oil-fired boilers can be set to burn at 85-87% efficiency maximum due to the problems inherent in managing oil-emission condensate that occurs when oil is burned at a higher efficiency rate. Masonry heaters similarly burn the wood at around 85% efficiency. However, CCHRC\'s masonry heater is fired only once per day instead of running continuously through the day. Also, data that we have on PM2.5 emissions clearly shows that masonry heaters contribute fewer PM2.5 emissions to the atmosphere than oil-fired boilers. Furthermore, because the Masonry Heater burns so effectively, CCHRC uses less than 2 cords of wood per year. Masonry heaters are approved under LEED for Homes with where potential for \'backdraft\' is minimized and has been documented. The masonry heater in this building meets these requirements. In addition, atmospheric pressure inside the building is monitored by the building automation system, which can notify the building manager in the unlikely event that significant negative pressure occurs. In conclusion, we believe the masonry heater should be credited for this project because its fuel is renewable & low in embodied energy, its particulate emissions are lower than the oil boilers, and its use is carefully measured & managed. It benefits the environment by lowering fossil fuel consumption and carbon footprint.

Can a third party such as a utility company install and operate a Solar PV system on the rooftop of a LEED project, and can the owner achieve EA c2 credit (1%) and possibly an exemplary performance credit (5%) for Core and Shell V2.0 rating system? Intent of Credit: Encourage and recognize increasing levels of on-site renewable energy self-supply in order to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use. Approach: A new program has been initiated in the San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E)territory named Clean Energy Systems. The objective of this program is to find usable roof space (at least 5,000 sf)in high performance buildings such as this project where a Solar PV system can be installed, operated, and maintained by SDG&E. The impetus for this unique program is to use available secure roof top space to increase its renewable energy system portfolio that will help SDG&E get to its 20% overall renewable energy portfolio as required by California State Law. It would be the intent of SDG&E to sign a long-term lease space contract with the Owner of this project and install at least 5,000 sf of Solar PV array up on the roof of this and possibly the other two future buildings (Buildings B and C)in this core and shell complex. As mentioned previously, the motivation of SDG&E will be to grid-tie this renewable energy to assist them in achieving the 20% portfolio threshold. The motivation of the Owner is to achieve at least one and maybe two LEED points even though they will not necessarily be using electricity generated from the Solar PV system. The owner would sign a contract with SDG&E before this project is submitted via LEED Online sometime in the Fall of this year 2008. We would provide evidence to this plus an implementation schedule for installation of the system on at least Building A during design submittals. Confirmation of Credit Intent: We believe this approach does meet the intent of the credit providing renewable energy self-supply in order to reduce the environmental effects of fossil fuel consumption (aka global warming)while providing the developer with very needed LEED points in order to achieve LEED Silver for its Building A project. We also believe that this approach will be occurring more frequently in the near future with progressive utilities offering to lease roof space on LEED-registered buildings for independent Solar PV farms. Please verify that this approach summarized above does fulfill the intent of Credit EA c2.

The project team is planning on installing a Cogeneration System that will take Biogas and turn it into Electricity to be used wholly on-site. The heat produced by this Cogeneration system will also fully be used on-site to preheat heating hot water and domestic hot water via a heat exchanger and potentially to power an absorption chiller.The building will receive the Biogas from a local Biogas provider and plans to enter into at least a 10 year contract with this provider to supply enough Biogas to the building to fully power the planned Cogeneration system. The contract will stipulate both that enough Biogas will be fed into the pipeline to meet required demands of the Cogeneration system and that the Biogas will be metered to prove that the actual amount of Biogas supplied meets the contracted requirements at all times.Though the Biogas is not being piped exclusively to the site (contractually it is supplied exclusively via project ownership funds), it is transported directly to the site in the existing natural gas pipeline. This approach achieves the exact same net result on the Natural Gas grid as piping Biogas exclusively to the project site in its own dedicated pipeline and allows the project to avoid having to dig up 100s of miles of land and lay a brand new pipeline to the project, something that would have a significantly detrimental effect on the local environment. In an urban environment like where the project is located, there is little or no option to be able to refine and extract Biogas on-site or even very close to a site, so the approach the project team is suggesting is the best and most reasonable alternative.Is this approach acceptable in accordance with the Reference Guide and Addendum 100001081 (November 1, 2011)?