CS-2009 EAc5.1: Measurement and Verification—Base Building

  • M&V helps buildings live up to expectations

    Despite aiming high during design, LEED-certified buildings don’t always perform as well as expected. A measurement and verification (M&V) program can make building operators aware of performance issues, and  can locate the source of problems or identify poor design assumptions while providing a better overall sense of how the building’s systems are functioning. 

    While M&V can be applied to a variety of metrics, including water use and indoor environmental quality, EAc5.1 focuses only on energy performance. To earn it, you’ll need to develop an M&V plan, install devices to support the plan, and provide guidelines for tenants to carry out submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system).

    Beyond your M&V plan, projects can also receive one point under this credit just by agreeing to share utility information through Energy Star as part of MPR6.

    EAc5.1 vs. EAc5.2

    For EAc5.1 you must write and M&V plan and actually measure the base building’s electrical energy use. This credit is generally best for buildings where the owner will be occupying space in the core-and -shell building and can take advantage of energy savings. The HVAC system will be a big driver on whether or not to pursue this credit. If your building has a central HVAC then there is a lot of equipment to monitor and therefore lots of potential savings. If you have mostly distributed HVAC (like split systems) then the savings are less obvious.

    Whereas, EAc5.2 you will only need to write an M&V plan for tenants to use and set up infrastructure, but don’t actually have to do any measurements ideal if your project will have LEED-CI tenants or if tenants plan to make energy improvements. Your project can attempt one or both. Some M&V providers and owners tend to think EAc5.2 is easier because the tenant is responsible for the task of actual monitoring.

    Choosing systems to monitor

    The M&V process includes writing a plan and incorporating a metering or building management system to compare your project’s actual performance against design predictions. Determining which systems should be monitored is building-specific rather than prescribed by the credit requirements. 

    The systems that are monitored depend on the scope of the Core and Shell building, mechanical system design, and installed equipment. In general, you are expected to monitor energy from all systems or components that get the data points for end uses identified in the energy model, or from all energy-saving equipment. 

    Your M&V program will keep the owner or tenant informed of energy use over the course of project occupancy, help reduce energy costs, assist with commissioning and, over time, document and improve energy conservation measures (ECMs). 

    Is it worth it?

    The cost of an M&V program varies from one project to the next. Added costs come from designing and installing specific monitoring systems, multiple meters, additional wiring, and the extra man-hours involved. The cost is typically higher in larger and more complex (multi-use) buildings; however, the cost premium will be lower if your project already plans to include a building management system (BMS) or submeters to record energy usage data. Another benefit of M&V in a core and shell building is the attraction and retention of tenants. So, this credit is not just about energy savings.

    If your building is small, with minimum uses, and needs only a few meters to meet the credit, your M&V program will be more affordable. If your project involves complex mechanical and electrical systems in a large building without a BMS, you may find this credit incredibly expensive—potentially cost-prohibitive.

    To make the upfront investment worthwhile, the owner must be committed to developing and implementing an M&V program, analyzing and understanding the building’s performance, and acting on the results. Typically, the cost premium of M&V installation and operation can be offset by long-term energy savings, though this is highly dependent on the building type as well as the owner’s willingness to endorse the needed changes and upgrades. 

    Who does it?

    The “M&V provider” takes responsibility for developing the plan. This role can be filled by the commissioning agent, energy modeler, mechanical engineer, project engineer, or a facilities manager.

    What’s the standard?

    The industry standard for M&V, both in the U.S. and internationally, is the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits.), owned by the nonprofit Efficiency Valuation Organization. LEED has singled out Volume III of the IPMVP guidance as the basis of its requirements. Several organizations have published M&V guidelines based on IPMVP. Among them are ASHRAE, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), and some utilities and states that fund energy-efficiency projects. Some organizations with M&V standards offer guidance in writing M&V plans, including sample language.

    FAQs for EAc5.1

    How can I choose between Option 1 (Calibrated Simulation) and Option 2 (Energy Conservation Measure Isolation)?

    Option 2 is only appropriate for measures that are simple to analyze and that have few or no interaction with other building systems. For most new buildings and gut rehabs, there will be significant interaction between systems (such as lighting and HVAC) and Option 1 (simulation) will be the best option.

    What am I required to submeter for this credit?

    For EAc5.1, there are no specific requirements. In your M&V plan, you will identify the uses you will submeter or monitor in order to confirm your energy savings. If you are pursuing Option 2 (Energy Conservation Measure Isolation), it may make sense to directly submeter the equipment in question. For the related tenant M&V credit, EAc5.2, tenant spaces must submetered or independently metered by the electric utility.

Legend

  • Best Practices
  • Gotcha
  • Action Steps
  • Cost Tip

Pre-Design

Expand All

  • Discuss as a team whether M&V will contribute to your project’s goals for energy reduction and system monitoring. Consider your project’s size, its complexity, your tenants’ needs, and whether or not to run a whole-building energy model. Also think about how the building will be operated. If the M&V program is not likely to be fully utilized by the owner, it may not be an appropriate investment.


  • Talk to the facility operations staff about the financial benefits and operational requirements of the M&V plan. Any energy savings achieved through M&V will depend on their participation.


  • Introduce the M&V program into the design early in the process, because it can affect the design of the mechanical and electrical systems as well as the BMS. There is also inherent value in having the design teams think about how the building will be operated.


  • Determine whether attempting EAc5.1, EAc5.2, or both is best for your project. Achieving both will earn your project a total of six points. You can attempt one or both—neither is dependent on the other.

    • EAc5.1: Measurement and Verification—Base Building – Develop an M&V program that measures the energy uses of the base building (as distinct from tenant spaces). If your project does not have any electrical equipment, it is ineligible for this credit.
    • EAc5.2: Measurement and Verification—Tenant Submetering – You will only need to write an M&V plan for tenants to use and set up infrastructure, but don’t actually have to do any measurements—which is a good idea if your project will have LEED-CI tenants or if tenants plan to make energy improvements. 

  • Consider incorporating a building management system (BMS) into the building. A BMS will streamline implementation of this credit, but might not be appropriate or affordable for small projects. A BMS allows you to collect data over time, to identify trends, and to diagnose issues that would not be apparent from simply reviewing whole building energy data. A meter simply tells you there is a problem where as a BMS can tell you why.


  • Consider the impact of an M&V program on mechanical system design requirements.  Keep in mind whether or not your mechanical system is capable of providing the necessary outputs for the BMS or metering system. The energy usage outputs are typically listed as kW, BTU, or therms over a given period of time. An automated record on a BMS or a metered reading on the equipment may be manually carried out at regular intervals. The specifics of the output metric and duration need to be determined in your M&V program and depend on the systems installed. 


  • The “M&V provider” develops the M&V plan. This role can be filled by the commissioning agent, energy modeler, mechanical engineer, project engineer, or a facilities manager. 


  • Contract with the M&V provider early in the process so that system components and recommendations can be implemented seamlessly rather than becoming add-ons. Trying to implement an M&V plan later in the process can lead to increased cost for extra wiring, output configuration, and monitoring equipment. 


  • EAc5.1 for LEED-CS buildings is similar to the requirements for LEED-NC EAc5, but with an additional emphasis on including information on tenant sub-metering in the M&V plan. However, your project is not required to separately meter each tenant space for EAc5.1. The focus of your M&V plan should be on electricity-using systems in the core-and-shell base building. 


  • Discuss the potential scope of your M&V plan. Will you meter natural gas, water consumption, or other variables? You will be required to meter all electricity-using systems, but should also consider expanding the scope to include natural gas too. Some projects find it helpful to incorporate water meters in an effort to verify water-reduction goals. 


  • EAc5.1 focuses on electricity-using systems and projects that do not use electrical systems are not eligible for this credit. 

Schematic Design

Expand All

  • General Considerations


  • Determine whether IPMVP Option B or Option D is most appropriate for your project design:

    • Option B is based on engineering calculations using metered data and is generally more appropriate for buildings with non-interactive loads only.
    • Option D uses calibrated, whole-building energy simulations for both the baseline and design case and is generally more appropriate for larger, more complex building projects using an energy model. 

    More tips on Option B versus Option D are below, at the end of Schematic Design.

     


  • Design systems to collect data to support calculations (Option B) or calibration of simulations (Option D) from a combination of meters and sensors. These can be included in a building automation system or through temporary installation of additional sensors and data loggers as needed.


  • Energy savings are determined by comparing actual metered, or measured, energy use to the projected energy use of a baseline building under similar operating conditions.

    • Energy Savings = Projected Baseline Energy Use – Post-Construction Energy Use (actual metered energy use).
    • Post-Construction Energy Use is determined by utility metering or submetering, or by using an energy simulation model of the projected building.

  • Discuss which energy-using systems your M&V plan may cover and how those systems or components can be measured. 


  • The M&V program must monitor the energy use of all systems installed during Core-and-Shell work and provide the infrastructure for tenant metering, though it does not need to individually measure tenant spaces.


  • Only electricity is required to be submetered in Core-and-Shell projects. Electricity for lighting, plug loads, and HVAC can be metered together, but this may not always be possible due to system constraints, unknown lighting or plug loads, or your project scope. Consider monitoring gas as well; this will give you a better idea of your building’s total energy use.


  • Some utility districts prohibit tenant submetering and charging by a third-party provider, so be sure to double check this if you plan to separately submeter tenant spaces. If your local utility does not allow third-party submetering, see if it will install separate meters for the tenants.


  • Some utility companies provide incentives or rebates for submetering and BMS programs. For example, cities have provided $2,000 per meter for advanced master-meter installation in affordable housing and $1,500 per meter in market-rate housing. Check with your local utility to find out about available rebates.


  • The cost of M&V can vary significantly from one project to another. You’ll need to get project-specific bids based on your individual design needs. Accuracy and cost of M&V plans are influenced by the following: 

    • level of detail and effort associated with verifying post-construction conditions;
    • number and types of metering points;
    • duration and accuracy of metering activities;
    • number and complexity of dependent and independent variables that must be measured or determined on an ongoing basis;
    • availability of existing data collection systems, such as energy management;
    • and the level of precision designed and specified into the system, and your confidence in the data analysis.

  • The highest return on investment is provided by an M&V program that is implemented throughout the life of the building.  


  • Option B: Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Isolation


  • Isolating and metering different ECMs, such as HVAC systems or lighting, can provide useful information on energy consumption and provide insights about energy reduction measures.


  • The cost implications for ECM isolation depend on how many meters are installed and the complexity of the systems being monitored. If systems are easily isolated and don’t require many meters, this credit can be relatively inexpensive to achieve, and Option B is more cost-effective than Option D. (See the appendix in ASHRAE Guideline 14-2004, for estimating the cost of meters.)


  • Option D: Calibrated Simulation


  • Option D is the best choice for projects with highly efficient building envelopes, and efficient mechanical and electrical systems, where energy savings measures will overlap. 


  • Permanent submetering or a BMS is not necessary—project teams can instead choose a combination of utility analysis, spot-metering, and permanent metering. However, these other methods do not provide the detailed information that a BMS can, and may not help projects determine energy problems or understand actual energy use. An M&V plan without a BMS is rare in large, new-construction projects. Smaller, single-occupancy buildings may find that packaged energy monitors or monthly utility bills can provide helpful feedback without investment in a costly BMS. 


  • Most M&V programs submeter individual systems such as lighting, heating, and cooling. Plug loads are not always submetered individually—it is easiest to individually submeter larger items and then subtract total plug load data from total building usage to get an estimated plug load. 


  • An M&V program generally includes sensors—which measure the watts of energy draw, temperature, length of time, and other variables—and a central processor, which stores the collected information and helps building managers interpret it. Building automation systems typically include the central processor needed for M&V, but not all of the sensors or the additional programming to tally energy use and track patterns. Adding these pieces to a building automation system, however, is relatively easy.


  • Submetering different use areas in mixed-use buildings, such as office and laboratory spaces, can offer insight into what energy reduction measures are most appropriate for each space type. 


  • The cost implications of this credit can vary and depend on the complexity of the meters and the submetering system, the cost of energy modeling and calibration, the cost of commissioning M&V components, and the size and complexity of the building. (See Resources for more information.)


  • M&V retrofits typically average no more than 5% of the total project cost, studies show. 


  • For new construction, the combined cost of the installed equipment and the first year of monitoring is generally less than 1% of the total project cost for buildings larger than 150,000 ft2—and less than 1.5% for smaller buildings, according to studies.


  • The cost to create an M&V program for Option D, according to IPMVP, is influenced by the following:

    • size and complexity of ECMs, systems or building;
    • accuracy of the difference between actual and estimated energy use (a less accurate calculation costs less in man-hours); 
    • simulation software and its associated complexity;
    • and the extent and sophistication of submetering.

Design Development

Expand All

  • Determine the extent of the M&V program based on the owner’s goals, the project type and function, and IPMVP requirements. M&V goals can be included in the Owner’s Project Requirements and Basis of Design documents for the commissioning credits EAp1 and EAc3


  • The M&V provider reviews the project design to determine which systems and equipment will be metered, and also determines how many meters will be required. See the guide to commonly metered items in the Documentation Toolkit.


  • The M&V provider works with the mechanical engineer to verify that all systems are designed to allow metering and submetering. Meters and energy systems must be capable of interfacing with the selected BMS or metering system. 


  • The mechanical engineer designs and specifies the appropriate submetering devices, controls, and M&V system. The M&V provider verifies that the M&V program and systems are capable of providing the information required for the credit.


  • Permanent installation of water meters allows easier monitoring of water consumption and greater savings. Although this is not required for LEED, water metering for graywater and rainwater systems is generally included in M&V plans, and monitoring general water use is also worthwhile to verify projected savings. 


  • Start early—adding an M&V program after mechanical and electrical systems have been designed may be cost-prohibitive due to redesign costs.


  • Option B: Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Isolation


  • The M&V provider determines the ECMs that need isolation and verifies that these systems do not interact with any other ECMs. 


  • The M&V provider works with the owner and the mechanical engineer to determine the best solution for metering or submetering ECMs.


  • Option D: Calibrated Simulation


  • The M&V provider works with the owner to determine the best system for monitoring actual energy use. 


  • Run a preliminary energy model. If an energy model is being developed for EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance, the model can be used as the energy-use baseline for your M&V plan. Or, a new model may be run to determine the baseline energy use. The actual energy use will be compared to this baseline. 


  • If applicable, the BMS should be set up to collect data that allows fair comparison between actual and predicted energy use. For example, since weather patterns are factored into the energy model, the BMS should capture these along with other parameters, such as operating schedule, occupancy density, space use, and system settings. 


  • To achieve this credit under Option D, the M&V program must be able to identify specific building performance issues. A BMS, or submetering, can build this capacity into your system.


  • Whole-building calibration simulation requires information about the instruments that enable the project to monitor the categories listed in the IPMVP. 


  • The determination of systems to be monitored is building-specific rather than prescribed by the credit requirements. 

Construction Documents

Expand All

  • General


  • The M&V provider develops the M&V plan. If possible, involve the facility’s operational staff in writing the plan, which must define the following:

    • M&V system design;
    • meter locations and specifications;
    • one-line electrical schematics identifying end-use circuits;
    • and guidelines for tenant submetering.

  • Coordinate with your mechanical and electrical engineers to verify that the control devices will be able to provide the information needed for credit compliance.


  • The owner’s goals and IPMVP guidelines should drive the M&V plan, which should specify the systems to be submetered, those to be spot-metered, and how this will be accomplished. The plan also explains the infrastructure design, locations of meters and meter specifications, the one-line electrical schematics identifying end-use circuits, and the details of tenant submetering. However, tenant submetering is not actually required for this credit—only for EAc5.2: Measurement and Verification—Tenant Submetering


  • Your plan should establish who is responsible for managing the process during operations and how long the monitoring will continue. 


  • Through a narrative report, the M&V program provider demonstrates that the M&V program will verify actual energy use. For energy systems not addressed in the M&V plan, you’ll need to provide a detailed reason for its exclusion in the narrative. 


  • The industry standard for M&V plans, both in the U.S. and internationally, is the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP), owned by the nonprofit Efficiency Valuation Organization. LEED has singled out Volume III of the IPMVP guidance as the basis of its requirements, and several organizations have published M&V guidelines based on IPMVP. Among them are the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE); the U.S. Department of Energy’s Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP); and some utilities and states that fund energy-efficiency projects. Some organizations with M&V standards offer guidance in writing M&V plans, including sample language.


  • Option B: Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Isolation


  • Determine the baseline energy use for ECMs.


  • Projected baseline energy use can be determined using energy efficiency standards or guidelines.


  • Option D: Calibrated Simulation


  • Run a final energy model that reflects all of the as-designed, energy-efficiency measures.  


  • Projected baseline energy use is calculated by an energy model during the design phase. All ECMs are removed from the model, and this energy data becomes the baseline to determine energy savings when compared to actual energy use. According to Option D of IPMVP III, the model must be calibrated so that it is ready to be used after one year of data collection.


  • It is easiest to calibrate the as-built energy simulation software if submetering devices correlate with the breakdown of the energy usage in the energy model. 


  • When applicable, the M&V plan should specify submetering sensor locations. Define the specific sensors, giving their location and sampling rates. In the plan, define the required energy model output and how measured data will be compared to the energy model. Also define how loads are arranged and grouped in electric panels. Mixing power, lighting, and HVAC equipment loads within individual panels is not recommended. 

Construction

Expand All

  • General


  • Install and commission the M&V submetering devices, or BMS, to verify functional accuracy.


  • Installation of the M&V system should be fairly straightforward. Depending on the system and the experience of the subcontractors, however, specialized contractors may be needed. (See Resources for information on qualified practitioners.) 


  • Option D: Calibrated Simulation 


  • Verify that the whole-building simulation model matches the as-built design. 

Operations & Maintenance

Expand All

  • General


  • Meters and submeters should be recalibrated periodically according to manufacturers’ recommendations.


  • Encourage your operations team to use data generated by the M&V program to run the building at optimal efficiency. 


  • The payback period for M&V programs depends on the initial cost of additional meters and whether the program has identified inefficiencies that wouldn’t have been found otherwise. Some fixes may be substantial and will pay for the metering system. After the BMS or metering system has been installed, the true return depends on the commitment of the owner and operational staff. Because M&V systems monitor actual building operation over time, M&V procedures can lead to valuable operational savings by uncovering building system design, installation, and control issues not caught during the commissioning process. 


  • M&V programs require continuous energy use and staff attention. One of the larger costs associated with this credit is the time needed by staff to read, interpret, and act on feedback provided by an M&V program that needs manual or spot readings. Although more expensive to install, an integrated, computerized BMS that assists in day-to-day management can financially benefit a complex building or one with multi-tenant spaces. 


  • The M&V plan should be implemented for at least the first year of building operations.


  • Ensure that appropriate personnel are trained to optimize the system to its greatest potential.


  • Track and archive trending data with utility metering and energy submetering systems required by the M&V plan.


  • Provide a yearly summary report that identifies both energy performance issues and corrective actions.


  • Record any post-construction upgrades or changes to operations and maintenance in order to best understand post-construction energy use. 


  • To account for operational changes, a 5%–10% discrepancy—between baseline and  post-construction energy use—may be acceptable. 


  • Option B: Energy Conservation Measure Isolation


  • The facilities manager or M&V provider compares baseline energy use of the ECMs to post-construction energy use.


  • The ECM usage can be tracked on a simple spreadsheet; complicated calculations or modeling is not required.


  • Option D: Calibrated Simulation


  • Set up the BMS to provide monthly reports as required by the M&V plan, if applicable. 


  • Include actual occupancy and weather data when calibrating the energy simulation model after the building’s first-year energy usage data becomes available. The energy modeler performs the calibrated simulation with the assistance of the M&V provider. 


  • The calibrated energy simulation gives the owner and facility operator a true picture of savings from the ECMs instead of the predicted savings from the energy model developed during design. A simulation model developed during design makes a lot of assumptions about occupancy patterns, set points, and weather. A calibrated energy model replaces those assumptions with real data while accommodating unforeseen program changes. If the actual results are 10% greater than the predicted ones, compare the differences between the assumptions and the actual settings. Calibration is a great learning opportunity for the modeler to verify those assumptions with actual data. After the first year, you do not need to recalibrate the model; instead, use utility bills to compare against energy usage from previous years.


  • Energy savings is verified by either comparing the calibrated, as-built model to the calibrated, baseline model—or by comparing calibrated, baseline energy use to actual metered energy use.


  • Calibration of the energy model adds a small amount on top of the cost of the baseline, as-built, energy model.

  • USGBC

    Excerpted from LEED 2009 for Core and Shell Development

    EA Credit 5.1: Measurement and verification - base building

    3 Points

    Intent

    To provide for the ongoing accountability of building energy consumption over time.

    Requirements

    Option 1

    Develop and implement a measurement and verification (M&V) plan consistent with Option D: Calibrated Simulation (Savings Estimation Method 2) as specified by the International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocol (IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits.), Volume III: Concepts and Options for Determining Energy Savings in New Construction, April 2003.

    The documentation must include the following:

    • A description of the infrastructure design.
    • Existing meter locations.
    • Existing meter specifications.
    • 1-line electrical schematics identifying end-use circuits.
    • Guidelines for carrying out tenant sub-metering.

    OR

    Option 2

    Develop a and implement a measurement and verification (M&V) plan consistent with Option B: Energy Conservation Measure Isolation, as specified by the International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocol (IPMVP), Volume III: Concepts and Options for Determining Energy Savings in New Construction, April 2003.

    The documentation must include the following:

    • A description of the infrastructure design.
    • Existing meter locations.
    • Existing meter specifications.
    • 1-line electrical schematics identifying end-use circuits.
    • Guidelines for carrying out tenant sub-metering.

    OR

    Option 3. Third Party Data Source (1 point)

    Meet MPR 6 through compliance Option 1: Energy and Water Data Release Form. Projects must register an account in ENERGY STAR’s Portfolio Manager tool and share the project file with the USGBC master account.

    Potential Technologies & Strategies

    Develop an M&V plan to evaluate building and/or energy system performance. Characterize the building and/or energy systems through energy simulation or engineering analysis. Install the necessary metering equipment to measure energy use. Track performance by comparing predicted performance to actual performance, broken down by component or system as appropriate. Evaluate energy efficiency by comparing actual performance to baseline performance.

    While the IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. describes specific actions for verifying savings associated with energy conservation measures (ECMs) and strategies, this LEED credit expands upon typical IPMVP M&V objectives. M&V activities should not necessarily be confined to energy systems where ECMs or energy conservation strategies have been implemented. The IPMVP provides guidance on M&V strategies and their appropriate applications for various situations. These strategies should be used in conjunction with monitoring and trend logging of significant energy systems to provide for the ongoing accountability of building energy performance.

Technical Guides

IPMVP Volume I

IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. is the standard upon which the LEED M&V requirements are based. Use these documents should be used in designing the M&V system and plan. 


IPMVP Volume III

IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. is the standard upon which the LEED M&V requirements are based. Use these documents should be used in designing the M&V system and plan. 


ASHRAE Guidelines 14-2004

ASHRAE provides technical guidelines for designing an M&V plan. This document can assist project teams in designing and implementing the M&V systems and plan.  


M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Federal Energy Projects

These M&V guidelines are written for federal buildings but could be helpful for many projects. 


Applications Team, Energy-Efficiency Design Applications: Measurement & Verification Documents

This website provides a list of resources to help teams implement an M&V program.

Software Tools

WATERGY Software

NOTE: WATERGY is not currently available, but may be again in the future.

WATERGY is a spreadsheet model that uses water and energy relationship assumptions to analyze the potential of water savings and associated energy savings. 

Articles

Environmental Building News, June 2006.

This article discusses the usefulness of M&V, including examples of problems that M&V systems have been able to identify. 

Publications

Energy Management Handbook, By Wayne C. Turner, Warren Heffington

Chapter 27 covers Measurement and Verification of Energy Savings and has some very useful information from the history of M&V, including various methods and equipment. 


Efficiency Valuation Organization (EVO) Blog

This blog includes regular articles from EVO insiders (and outsiders who meet our editorial guidelines) to inspire discussion on M&V topics. 

Organizations

The Energy Valuation Organization and the Association of Energy Engineers

The Energy Valuation Organization, in conjunction with the Association of Energy Engineers, offers an M&V professional certification program. The Association of Energy Engineers holds training seminars for those preparing to take the certification exam and anyone else interested in learning the fundamentals of M&V and working with IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits..

Web Tools

USGBC Building Performance Partnership

USGBC’s Building Performance Partnership (BPP) engages commercial and residential LEED building owners and managers in an effort to optimize the performance of buildings through data collection, analysis and action. This partnership among USGBC and the thousands of LEED project owners will result in the population of a comprehensive green building performance database, enable standardization of reporting metrics and analytics, and establish new performance benchmarks. USGBC’s BPP participants are eligible for annual performance reports, report cards and real-time data interfaces to aid in their building performance goals. Together, USGBC and BPP participants will transform the way the world views building operations.

Template for M&V Plan

Option D: Calibrated Simulation

The Measurement and Verification (M&V) plan template shown here is based on Option D: Calibrated Simulation.

LEED Online Forms: CS-2009 EA

The following links take you to the public, informational versions of the dynamic LEED Online forms for each CS-2009 EA credit. You'll need to fill out the live versions of these forms on LEED
Online
for each credit you hope to earn.

These links are posted by LEEDuser with USGBC's permission. USGBC has certain usage restrictsions for these forms; for more information, visit LEED Online and click "Sample Forms Download."

The following links take you to the public, informational versions of the dynamic LEED Online forms for each CS-2009 EA credit. You'll need to fill out the live versions of these forms on LEED
Online
for each credit you hope to earn.

These links are posted by LEEDuser with USGBC's permission. USGBC has certain usage restrictsions for these forms; for more information, visit LEED Online and click "Sample Forms Download."

Design Submittal

PencilDocumentation for this credit can be part of a Design Phase submittal.

M&V Plan Sample

Option D: Calibrated Simulation

This Measurement and Verification (M&V) plan sample follows Option D: Calibrated Simulation.

96 Comments

0
0
S Nagarajan
Nov 04 2014
Guest

EAc 5.1 for LEED C&S

Project Location: United Arab Emirates

Dear Sir

I am involved in a 5-storey building. The base building loads are mixed loads, i.e the loads include lighting and small power. The DB ( distribution board) has HVAC equipment loads ( air handling units) and also other loads like lifts. The contractor is not willing to provide separate meters for lighting and for plugged loads, and at the same time, the project the project team wants to get points for this. How should we go about. Some DBs contain pumps loads and also lighting loads together

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Nov 06 2014 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

You need to gather the data you need to calibrate the energy model. This usually requires the separation and measurement of each major energy end use. Having mixed boards makes this harder for submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system).. You always have the option of figuring out how to gather the data you need by had with spot measurements and short term trending. The bigger the building the more labor intensive this becomes post-occupancy.

I can't tell you the best way to do this but having mixed boards you are already off to a bad start.

Post a Reply
0
0
Ian McCall Environmental Engineer Le Sommer Environnement
Jun 04 2014
LEEDuser Member
493 Thumbs Up

EA Credit 5.1: Base Building Sub-metering

Hello all,
I am working on a large Core and Sheel project composed of office spaces and commercial centre (in France). The comercial centre is 5 stories high and occupied by one single tenant. The goal is to limit the number of sub-meters installed in the commercial centre.
The building has the following as energy supply:
1) District Heating System for Space Heating & Domestic Hot Water
2) District Cooling System for Air conditioning cooling
3) Electricity for external lighting, Cooling Electronic Fan coils, Cold storage plant, Fans / Ventilation (major), Lighting, Small Power, Outlets, elevators, escalators etc....

Can you confirm that we only need to meter the following three energy supplies for the credit EAct 5.1?
1) District Heating System for Space Heating & Domestic Hot Water
2) District Cooling System for Air conditioning cooling
3) Electricity - External lighting
For met it doesn't seem that difficult.
Thank-you,
Ian

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Jun 04 2014 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

No meters at all are required by the IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits..

You need to be able to gather the data needed to calibrate the energy model by energy end use on a monthly basis. This usually requires some level of electrical submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system). or gathering other data you can use to derive energy use by end use. You can gather much of that information by hand too. The question is - does the owner want to pay for hardware or labor?

Post a Reply
0
0
Redy Truccolo Engineer Ariatta Ingegneria dei Sistemi
May 21 2014
LEEDuser Member
284 Thumbs Up

EAc5.1 Review Report Help

Hi,

I received these technical advices but I don't really understand what they're asking me to add to the M&V Plan:

1. Specification of analytical techniques, algorithms, and/or software tools (name and version number), including any stipulated
parameters or operating conditions, and the range of conditions to which the techniques, algorithms, and software tools apply.

2.Final input/output files including important assumptions and any unusual modeling techniques employed during the development of
the model.

Is a C&S certification and the building is an office only type.
Thank you very much for your help!

Regards

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group May 23 2014 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

1. How are you doing the calculations associated with the M&V, what software are you using? See the IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. Section 3.2 for more information on what should be in the Plan.

2. What models are you using to do the calibration? I assume it would be the same models you used for EAp2. Did you do any work arounds or use any atypical modeling procedures?

Post a Reply
0
0
Jatuwat Varodompun Dr Green Building Soultion
Mar 25 2014
LEEDuser Member
1412 Thumbs Up

M&V plan for cold and dark shell

In case the system is yet designed, can CS project get the score in 5.1 and 5.2 by purely using tanant leasing agreement which has the M&V Plan as a reguirement to be responsible by tenants.

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Mar 25 2014 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

I would say it is not possible to do a reasonable M&V Plan.

Post a Reply
0
0
František Bartoš Ing. Enerfis s.r.o.
Nov 15 2013
Guest
78 Thumbs Up

Base building consumption breakdown

Hello,

is there any specification how should be consumption of base building divided and measured? For example in BreeamBuilding Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method, the first widely used green building rating system, developed in the U.K. in the early 1990s, currently used primarily in the U.K. and in Hong Kong. there are specification like "fans with input above 10 kW measure separately". I tried to find some similar specification in LEED CS document as well as in IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. document and didn´t find anything.

Question: Is there this kind of specification in any document? If not what´s the standard?

Question I´m solving:
- Lifts (don´t measure X measure together X measure separately)
- Cooling units (measure whole plantroom X measure units togehter X measure units separately)
- Heat exchanger plantroom (measure whole plantroom or somehow divide this consumption into separate meters)
- HVAC units (together X separately)

...and many many others very similar.

Whats the key to design this metering strategy?

1
2
0
Lauren Wallace LEED Project Reviewer, LEED AP BD+C, Senior LEED Specialist, Certifications Department Manager, Epsten Group, Inc. Nov 15 2013 LEEDuser Member 1377 Thumbs Up

Mr. Bartos,

Is your project planning to attempt EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance using an energy model? If so, it is my understanding that the minimum requirements for metering for your M and V Plan would be the same types of energy consumption used in your energy model. For example, if your energy model and EAc1 submittal indicate that you use natural gas and electricity, then your M and V Plan should indicate that you are tracking the consumption of natural gas and electricity. The breakdown of what you are metering is completely up to the building owner. I personally feel as though M and V Plans are more successful in identifying which areas of consumption need improvements when more items are metered separately from other energy-consuming elements. For example, if you metered each HVAC unit separately, you might realize through the M and V process that one unit might need setpoint adjustments, whereas the other units are running as intended. If you didn't separately meter these units, you might find yourself recommissioning all of the HVAC units, which would be a much more expensive process in the long run. Hope this helps!

2
2
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Nov 15 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

This particular standard sets out general guidelines and it is your job to interpret them and adapt them to your project. FEMP has published guidelines for Federal projects and they may help but I am not aware of any document specifying exactly what you need to do in your particular case.

It is up to you to determine the metering strategy that makes the most sense for your project. You will typically need to calibrate your energy model by energy end use on a monthly basis. Certainly any energy end use that consumes at least 5% of the total energy use should be measured. This does not mean you need to submeterSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy or water use within a building attributable to specific end uses such as tenant spaces, or subsystems such as the heating component of an HVAC system. everything. Some end uses can be derived, some can be estimated based on spot measurements or short term trending.

So look at your energy modeling results and figure out a plan to gather the data you would need to confirm your modeling inputs and calibrate the model. So from your examples above you appear to be focusing on the equipment rather than the energy end use. Rather than focus on the cooling units, heat exchanger plantroom and HVAC units, focus on the energy end use components like heating, cooling, fans, pumps, etc.

Post a Reply
0
0
James Keohane, PE LEED BD+C CxA CPMP Sustainability and Commissioning Consultant Sustainable Engineering Concepts, LLC
Nov 12 2013
LEEDuser Member
726 Thumbs Up

Deciding to choose Option 1(D) or Option 2(B)

I am trying to think thru and identify the first cost difference of Option1(IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. Option D) or Option 2 ( IPMVP Option B).

For a new office building, 100,000s.f. with a likely 100% tenant identified using a triple net lease and with all electric energy source.........it seems as if our team could choose either option. The identified tenant will be required to earn LEED CI.

True? Not? See any roadblocks to earning LEED for CI EAcr3?

My thinking: The credit language does not prohibit new construction from using Option 2(IPMVP Option B). Implementation of Option 2(IPMVP Option B) would seem less expensive(my gut reaction with no real world pricing) path than Option 1.

Your comments, thoughts and wisdom would be most welcomed.

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Nov 13 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

Option B rarely applies to new construction projects in my experience. Your project would have to have almost no energy efficiency strategies that result in interactive effects (i.e. lighting affects heating and cooling) or develop a method for accounting for the interactive effects. So if your project has very limited energy saving measures that can be easily isolated from one another then Option B is possible.

Post a Reply
0
0
Rudolph Carneiro HVAC consultant Sustentech
Oct 24 2013
Guest
637 Thumbs Up

Separating lighting metering from plug load metering.

I have seen many comments in this forum stating that plug loads should be metered seperately from lighting loads. I'm not sure if seperating these loads is actually necessary. We have a high rise building seeking C&S certification. The owner is installing all the lighting and outlets for tenant spaces. A number of busways run vertically through all the tenant occupied spacesOccupied Spaces are defined as enclosed spaces that can accommodate human activities. Occupied spaces are further classified as regularly occupied or non-regularly occupied spaces based on the duration of the occupancy, individual or multi-occupant based on the quantity of occupants, and densely or non-densely occupied spaces based upon the concentration of occupants in the space.. One Busway feeds lighting and pug loads on each of the floors. This busway is equiped with one electrical meter at the base of the building to measure the lighting and plug loads together. Our energy model seperates plug load energy use from lighting energy use. The ASHRAE baseline plug load use is identical to the proposed in our energy model. Therefore we have no ECMs associated with plug loads.
Question: Is there any problem with this metering setup for an M&V plan? Should we be asking Project teams to seprate plug load circuitry from lighting circuitry? Why?

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Oct 25 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

You cannot properly calibrate the energy model without some mechanism to verify the accurate modeling of energy use by each end use. You do not necessarily have to submeterSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy or water use within a building attributable to specific end uses such as tenant spaces, or subsystems such as the heating component of an HVAC system. each one to do so. You can use spot measurements/short term trending to estimate one or the other of these uses and derive a separation through calculations based on data without having to separately submeter. The Plan should outline how you are going to separate these loads.

The fact that there are no ECMs associated with the plug loads does not matter. You still must claibrate the proposed energy model against the actual utility bills and verify that you modeling assumptions related to the plug loads and the lighting were correct or not. If not you change the model to reflect the data collected. This is a fundamental difference between the IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. applied to ECM project where there is before and after data versus new construction where there is no before data.

There is no problem with your metering set up (metering is not required at all by the IPMVP) as long as your Plan describes how these loads will be separately measured without submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system).. However, in a large high rise it is often far cheaper to submeter as opposed to gathering the necessary data by hand post-occupancy.

Post a Reply
0
0
Rudolph Carneiro HVAC consultant Sustentech
Oct 13 2013
Guest
637 Thumbs Up

Description of quality assurance procedures.

I recieved a comment for a project of mine and dont really know what they want exactly. They need a "description of quality assurance procedures".
Quality assurance of what exactly?
Is it verification of metering accuracy or does it have to do with the actual equipment performance?
If it is related to equipment performance, what performance? (ex. efficiencies of pumps, chillers, and cooling towers?)

Must we have implemented algorithms in the BMS programming to calculate pump, chiller, and cooling tower efficiency in real time?

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Oct 13 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

The quality of your calibration and verification. Think of it as quality control measures. How will you know that you produced accurate results?

Metering accuracy should be noted in the M&V Plan.

In order to properly calibrate the model you should also be checking the modeling assumption for equipment efficiency against what was installed. Depending on the situation you may need to develop a custom curve for the equipment if you suspect that the curve used in the model may not be accurate.

The essential issue is to know what the model needs to be calibrated within the level of accuracy cited in your Plan.

Post a Reply
0
0
Magnus Stagnäs Life Cycle Engineer Finnmap Consulting Oy
Oct 09 2013
Guest
465 Thumbs Up

Separate lighting and plug load sub-metering

Our client’s CS-project has been denied EAc5.2 because we haven’t provided separate sub-metering of tenant lighting and plug loads. According to the review comment, separate sub-metering is required by LEED CI EAc3. Our project is Case 1 (less than 75 % of total area).

Have I missed something here? The CI EAc3 credit language doesn’t say anything about separate sub-metering for Case 1 projects. Also, the Green Building Design and Construction Reference Guide (2009 edition) says clearly that for CS-projects, “electricity used for lighting and plug loads and to run HVAC equipment may be measured on a single meter and reported together”.

1
2
0
Ante Vulin Sustainability Manager, YR&G Oct 09 2013 LEEDuser Expert 1240 Thumbs Up

Magnus, I agree with your interpretation of EAc5.2 -- we have received this credit recently on several buildings, all of which were 10-20 stories high, and where we said any future tenants would definitely occupy less than 75% of the total. You may want to clarify in your response whether future CI projects will find themselves in Case 1 or Case 2.

2
2
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Oct 09 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

Table 2 under EAc3 in the ID+C Reference Guide certainly appears to require separate sub-meters for lighting and plug loads. This conflicts with the language in the BD+C version of the Reference Guide that you cite.

Sounds like you certainly have a case for questioning this review comment with GBCI (go on their web site and challenge the accuracy of the review comment within the Contact Us area) assuming that this is the only issue for that credit.

Personally I think the point of both these credits, which should obviously be compatible, is to have meters to measure each fuel source used by the tenants (not each end use). CS is about the infrastructure that enables the metering and CI is about installing and using them.

Post a Reply
0
0
Steve Gross Interface Engineering
Aug 12 2013
LEEDuser Member
68 Thumbs Up

Water Metering

Hello,

My question is in regards to what need to be metered on the water side. Does the utility meter suffice or do I need to provide a meter for hot and cold water independently? Also, what about irrigation?

I have DHWDomestic hot water (DHW) is water used for food preparation, cleaning and sanitation and personal hygiene, but not heating. energy metered, but not water quantity.

Thanks,

Steve

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Aug 13 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

I do not think you are required to meter water use for this credit.

If you do so I would think you would find more use in metering by end use.

Post a Reply
0
0
Florinda Garcia
Jul 12 2013
Guest
268 Thumbs Up

M&V

i am participating in a CS project, the building is a comercial office building all the office space will be for tenants. We are planning to apply for the credit EAc5.2, but we have a doubt, it is possbile that during the 1 year post- occupancy period, the building will not be 100% in operation, so the implementation of the M&V Plan, could not be posible in this period, but the owner wants to have all the metering points. To comply with this credit we can develop the Plan, and wait until the 100% occupancy of the building?

1
3
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Jul 15 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

Yes you can wait to install all of the meters.

2
3
0
Florinda Garcia Jul 16 2013 Guest 268 Thumbs Up

We will have all the meters, but maybe the building will be not 100% occupied, so we could wait utill the 100% of occupancy, that's right?

3
3
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Jul 16 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

No you earn the credit based on your plan, not its final implementation. So you do not have to wait for 100% occupancy.

Post a Reply
0
0
Gabriela Hernández Castillo Architect, LEED AP BD+C SYASA - México
Jul 08 2013
Guest
2599 Thumbs Up

Energy Model Calibration by Post Construction data

Our Project is applying for M&V plan option D method 2, which let us calibrate the energy model with post construction measures. Because of the electrical circuits we can measure the total building consumption, and individually the HVAC and Elevators consumption, while the lighting, pumps, and common areas services consumption can be estimated by calculating the operation time controlled on each item.

Is it valid to calibrate the energy model with these methodology?

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Jul 08 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

You can gather data on systems without submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system). the energy use. Run time works for some constant loads. Spot measurements and short-term trending works too.

Fundamentally what information do you need to calibrate the energy model? This depends on the systems and the M&V budget.

From your list above I do not see fans, heating, cooling, service hot water, and plug loads that are typically found in many projects. Your methodology is contained in your M&V Plan so make sure you include information on the data you will gather for each energy end use and also related to other modeling parameters like schedules and weather.

Post a Reply
0
0
MM K
Jun 18 2013
Guest
1512 Thumbs Up

List energy end uses

"The M and V Plan omits the table or listing of the project’s energy end uses as required by the form."

However, the Plan we have submitted lists the following:
Locations and types of energy meters are shown on drawing 10610/35008. The following energy types are metered: Electricity
LTHW
Chilled water
Domestic water
Softened Water
Gas

Is there any additional details that need to be listed regarding the energy end uses?

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Jun 18 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

Energy end uses are not the same as energy sources.

Energy end uses are typically interior lighting, exterior lighting, space heating, space cooling, fans, pumps, service hot water, plug loads, elevators, etc.

You cannot properly calibrate an energy model using just metered energy sources.

Post a Reply
0
0
Muhammad Faisal Azizullah Jaffar Sustainability Consultant Ramboll
Jun 02 2013
Guest
128 Thumbs Up

EA 5,1

We are working on a mall project going ahead with the LEED CS GOLD.We are currently on tender stage and the client has suddently come up with the LEED requirement. One of our competitors has also offered to provide the M&V service. The client wants us to provide a fee for this as well , but we reckon that this would not be a good idea to provide this service at this stage as we are very mature on the deisgn and almost going ahead with the tender. If we are suposed to go ahead with this credit, should we do it under Option B ? we do ahve BMS and sub metering and other ECMEnergy conservation measures are installations or modifications of equipment or systems intended to reduce energy use and costs. such as heat recovery and VFDA variable frequency drive (VFD) is a device for for controlling the speed of a motor by controlling the frequency of the electrical power supplied to it. VFDs may be used to improve the efficiency of mechanical systems as well as comfort, because they use only as much power as needed, and can be adjusted continuously.'s etc by default in the design. We need to finalize our fee regading this. Please advise .

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Jun 02 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

Option B rarely works for new construction as there are usually several interactive energy efficiency measures like lighting and envelope improvements that are very difficult to isolate.

The total fee is typically a combination of writing the plan and implementing it post-occupancy. The biggest variable in time it takes to implement a particular plan depends on the data collection methods. If everything you need is submetered it usually takes far less time to gather the data, if not you will need to gather what you need by some means of direct measurement. Most project need to do a bit of both.

Post a Reply
0
0
Ronald Dean Sumac Inc.
Apr 24 2013
Guest
1378 Thumbs Up

MPR#6 - Option 1: Sharing data via Energy Star Portfolio Manager

One of the projects I'm working on in Peru, is persuing the option 1 of MPR#6 (through Energy Star Portfolio Manager:ESPM) so we can get one EP point in EAc5.1. So, my questions are:

1. Just to confirm, does the ESPM for sharing the energy and water consumption data work for projects outside the US as well?
If so, when I'm asked for the ZIP code, should I write an arbitrary ZIP code of a US state with the same climate than Lima (2A) according to ASHRAE 90.1-2007?

2. Is there any other important issue about Portfolio Manager Energy Star for international LEED projects that I can take into consideration?

Please advice.

Thanks in advance.

1
3
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Apr 25 2013 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

I do not see any reason why you could not earn the point. I am not certain about using Portfolio Manger however since the data analysis within it does not apply internationally. I would think that the other options would work for sure.

Maybe someone at USGBC could respond?

2
3
0
Ronald Dean Sumac Inc. Apr 25 2013 Guest 1378 Thumbs Up

Thanks for your response Marcus.

Actually, I agree with the idea that even though Energy Star uses only energy US data for their statistics, the intent of this credit can still be achieved.
I asked this question to USGBC as well, I'll post the answer once I get it from them.

If someone else is familiar with this issue, it will be appreciated to share it here.

3
3
0
Ronald Dean Sumac Inc. May 06 2013 Guest 1378 Thumbs Up

Hi,

I got this answer for my question from Energy Star Support.

1. According to LEED, it's possible to use the Portfolio Manager for international projects too; however when I'm asked for the ZIP code and State of the building, should I write an arbitrary ZIP code of a US state with the same climate than Lima (2A) according to ASHRAE 90.1-2007?

Yes, it is possible for international facilities to benchmark and track energy and water performance within the EPA's Portfolio Manager system. When creating the facility within your Portfolio Manager account, you will have the option to select the correct Country. You will also have the option to select the nearest city. These selections will allow the Portfolio Manager system to account for local weather when generating annual performance metrics. For more information as to how the Portfolio Manager system accounts for weather, please see the following document, (http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/evaluate_performance/Methodology_W...).

I hope it helps.

Post a Reply
0
0
Ronald Dean Sumac Inc.
Mar 08 2013
Guest
1378 Thumbs Up

Exemplary Performance for EAc5.1

Hello,

I have seen in the form version 4.0 of leedonline for EAc5.1 that in the ADITIONAL DETAILS, there is an option (check box) that says: 'The Project is pursuing exemplary performanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. for EA Credit 5.1', however according to the LEED reference guide , this credit is not eligible for Exemplary Performance. So, please let me know whether or not this credit really applies for Exemplary Performance, and if so, is there a threshold to comply with?

Thanks in advance.

1
1
0
Tristan Roberts LEED AP BD+C, Editorial Director – LEEDuser, BuildingGreen, Inc. Mar 08 2013 LEEDuser Moderator

Yes, this was a 2/2/2011 addendum. The EP point is for pursuing Option 3 in addition to Options 1 or 2.

 

Post a Reply
0
0
Courtney Royal, LEED AP BD+C Sr. Sustainability Consultant Taitem Engineering
Dec 30 2012
LEEDuser Member
1186 Thumbs Up

Option 3, share whole bldg energy and water data

Hello!

This may be a stupid question, but I am reviewing the requirements for EAc5.1 and came across Option 3. I don't really understand this, isn't this a requirement per the MPRs and aren't all 2009 projects required to do this anyways? Our project is a CS project with future tenant fit out spaces and residential spaces. In this case, does P1 form 1 require the project to submit energy and water data for just the common areas (not tenant or residential spaces) and/or the spaces the developer has control over OR does it require all tenant spaces to submit their usage as well? If its the latter, then there isn't anymore work to be done and we would automatically get EAc5.1, right? The credit form doesn't allow you to select two options so it doesn't seem you have to do Option 1 if doing Option 3. I think I am missing something and pretty confused how this work for a CS project. This is my first CS project and I seem to have tons of questions. Please help!
Thanks, Courtney

1
2
0
Christopher Schaffner Principal & Founder, The Green Engineer, LLP Dec 31 2012 LEEDuser Expert 7674 Thumbs Up

Short answer:

The MPR requires you to report the data, if you have it. (Buildings without meters are not required to report.) Portfolio Manager is one option, but not required.

Option 3 gives you one point for reporting the data via Portfolio Manager.

2
2
0
Ronald Dean Sumac Inc. Mar 08 2013 Guest 1378 Thumbs Up

I had the same problem, but this document was a great help to understand the relationship between getting Exemplary PerformanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. for EAc5.1 and complying with MPR6. The link is here: http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8981

I hope it helps.

Post a Reply
0
0
Ivan Souza Sustainability Consultancy Services Cushman & Wakefield
Dec 20 2012
LEEDuser Member
943 Thumbs Up

M&V Plan - Specific Acceptable Range(s) of Error

Hello,

I just got the review comment requesting the “specific acceptable range(s) of error”, follow the comment bellow.

“TECHNICAL ADVICE:

Please revise the Measurement and Verification Plan, as necessary, to ensure that all required components of Option D of the 2003 IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. are included. Identify the specific acceptable range(s) of error (generally there is a different range allowable for both monthly and annual data).”

Could anyone confirm if the “specific acceptable range(s) of error” that they are requesting is the MBE (mean bias error) and the CV(RSME) (coefficient of variation of the root-mean-squared error)?

Thanks

1
2
0
Gordon Shymko Principal, G. F. Shymko & Associates Inc. Dec 20 2012 LEEDuser Expert 1157 Thumbs Up

The acceptable range of simulation calibration error varies with the nature of the project, the M&V objectives and associated desired rigor, and the complexity of the building and its systems. Having said this, I would consider a simulation to well-calibrated for most purposes and buildings if it meets the following criteria:

• +/- 10% for total annual energy use
• +/- 10% for each of total natural gas and electricity use
• +/- 15% for total monthly energy use
• +/- 15% for each of total natural gas and electricity use on a monthly basis for any month with use higher than 30% of the peak month
• +/- 15% for end-uses on an annual basis
• +/- 15% for end-uses on a monthly basis for any month with use higher than 30% of the peak month
• +/- 20% for individual major systems on an annual basis e.g. plants, individual air handling systems
• +/- 20% for individual major system on a monthly basis for any month with use higher than 30% of the peak month for that system e.g. plants, individual air handling systems

I hope that this helps put some perspective to the issue.

2
2
0
Ivan Souza Sustainability Consultancy Services, Cushman & Wakefield Dec 21 2012 LEEDuser Member 943 Thumbs Up

Thanks Gordon!

Post a Reply
0
0
Ronald Dean Sumac Inc.
Dec 10 2012
Guest
1378 Thumbs Up

submit to leed-online compliance

Good day,

i wonder what is the time that I can submit the M&V plan for credit 5.1.
May I submit it when the construccion is finished with the rest of the credits for C&S certification or I need to wait a year to submit this credit.

thanks

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Dec 10 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

You do not need to wait a year. Submit this with the other construction credits. It is evaluated based on your plan, not the implementation of it.

Post a Reply
0
0
Marcio Alberto Casado Pereira
Oct 16 2012
LEEDuser Member
3826 Thumbs Up

What to measure?

We are working on a multiple building campus, it's a residential project. We want to pursue EAc5.1 but we are not sure of which loads should be measured; since is a C&S, we understand that we should only provide submeters for the loads of the common areas, such as elevators, exterior lighting, right? I don't quite understand the definition of "base building".

Thanks

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Oct 16 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

You should measure what you need to measure to verify the energy savings claimed. If all of your savings are generated from things like elevators, exterior lighting, interior lighting in the core spaces, etc. then that is all you have to measure. In most C&S projects however there are other savings. For example, building envelope improvements which impact heating, cooling, fans, etc. related to the tenant spaces. Since you are modeling a fully occupied and complete facility the base building is the minimally code compliant version of your building.

So think in terms of building energy end uses, not just specific spaces.

Post a Reply
0
0
charles bell principal theGreenTeam, Inc.
Sep 26 2012
LEEDuser Member
807 Thumbs Up

EAc 5.1 for CS tenant spaces

Our current design has a Quadlogic multi-tenant smart meter unit in the basement of our mid-rise project. This unit has the capacity for electrical power as well as BTUA unit of energy consumed by or delivered to a building. A Btu is an acronym for British thermal unit and is defined as the amount of energy required to increase the temperature of 1 pound of water by 1 degree Fahrenheit, at normal atmospheric pressure. Energy consumption is expressed in Btu to allow for consumption comparisons among fuels that are measured in different units. monitoring. My question is will this qualify for EAc 5.2 M&V without physically placing meters at the floors above? This will give us flexibility to monitor the tenants without wasting meters where they are not needed. For instance, a tenant that has three floors doesn't necessarily need three meters. And, some floors may need multiple meters for multiple tenants. Thanks for your help.

1
3
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Sep 26 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

Makes sense to me. You need a tenant M&V Plan so it sounds like this flexibility is part of the plan. You just need to demonstrate that the system you have is capable of sub-metering tenant spaces.

2
3
0
charles bell principal, theGreenTeam, Inc. Sep 26 2012 LEEDuser Member 807 Thumbs Up

Thanks Marcus. Appreciate your quick response!!!

3
3
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Sep 26 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

My pleasure. Just noticed that the subject of your post is EAc5.1 and this is the page for EAC5.1 but your questions was related to EAc5.2. There is often considerable confusion in submitting the plans for these two credits and I don't want to add to it. An M&V Plan according to the IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. is very different from a tenant sub-metering plan. Just making sue your question was related to tenant sub-metering and not IPMVP.

Post a Reply
0
0
Ronald Dean Sumac Inc.
Aug 24 2012
Guest
1378 Thumbs Up

Lighting measurement

good day,
I have a project with 14 floors and our project scope is to control the hall and restroom lighting, we can measure and verify their savings.
I have a doubt about what I need to measure, my proyect has identical floor between 3 floor to 13. Basements, 1,2 and 14 floors are different, so we need to measure each floor with a meter for each zone; or can I measure the total consumption by the halls and bathrooms the way that only use 2 meter to connect to the BMS.

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Aug 27 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

In my experience how this is sub-metered depends on the electrical wiring design. If the lighting circuit for all the halls/restrooms are in a single panel box then you certainly could meter them together.

Keep in mind the goal will be to gather the data needed to calibrate the model. So you will need to get the data for the total lighting for the building and verify the lighting savings. You do not have to sub-meter by specific area or strategy to show the savings.

Post a Reply
0
0
Marco Abdallah
Aug 24 2012
Guest
773 Thumbs Up

Tenant Submetering connected to BMS?

We are pursueing 5.1 Opt. 1 and 5.2 at a CS-project with 10 floors leasable to different tenants. The electricity metering is not clear for me:

The RG says on page 317 that the monitoring network in the base building has to be capable of bein expanded to accomodate the future tenant submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system)..
For me this sounds as if we have to provide an interface/possibility (cables) to connect the future tenant meters to the BMS for data storage. Is that right or is it also possible to store the data locally on the meterin device?

On the other hand the EAc5.2 just says that tenant should have the possibility to measure their consumption as required by LEED CI.

We have to use the data from the tenant meters for the calibrated simulation. In case that the meter is not on the BMS the tenant has to commit to provide the stored data after the 1-year period, right?

Thanks in advance!

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Aug 24 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

One of the most common mistakes associated with these credits is to assume that the plan for one is the same as the plan for the other. The tenant submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system). is done by fuel type while the M&V submetering needs to be by energy end use to calibrate the model. Tenant submetering is often not particularly useful when calibrating the model since it does not contain enough of a breakdown by end use, especially for electricity.

Regarding your specific questions - the credit language specifically states that the data needs to be centrally monitored. This means to me that remote submeters that are read manually by the tenant or owner would not qualify but that any type of meter that has the ability to provide that data to a central location (could be internet based, wireless or hard wired) would qualify. A BMS based system would work. Utility meters for each tenant work too.

LEED CI EAc3 Case 1 spells out the submetering requirements within the tenanat space regarding what must be metered and how. The CS EAc5.1 simply indicates that this must be tied together at a central location.

If your M&V Plan for 5.1 includes the data gathered on the tenant submeters then yes you will need a way to make sure you can get it. This data could be of limited value in your calibration as noted above.

Post a Reply
0
0
Kathy Buck Senior Project Manager Neumann/Smith Architecture
Jul 17 2012
LEEDuser Member
1577 Thumbs Up

M&V period for LEED 2009 C&S projects for EAc5.1 + EAc5.2

The LEED reference guide is very particular in the language that they use to describe the intent and stragegies for EAc5.1 and 5.2 for C&S as being distinct from NC & Schools.

For NC& Schools, both options 1 and 2 both describe that "the M&V period must cover at least 1 year post-construction occupancy". However, there is NO such description of the M&V period for C&S for options 1 or 2, nor do the addenda for these credits add any such language for options 1 or 2, (or for option 3 added by addenda with post date 2/2/2011).

Has there been an official clarification/requirement for C&S M&V period by GBCI?

1
1
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Jul 17 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

I am not certain about an official clarification. But absent one I would think that it would be the same as NC.

An M&V period of less than a year does not make much sense for most projects. The model is measuring 8760 hours so to calibrate the model it should be based on the same. I suppose if the weather is the same year round or has no impact on energy use it could be done on less than one year's data but you would need to fully explain how this would be done in the M&V Plan.

Post a Reply
0
0
Randy Cook Associate Director The Rock Brook Consulting Group
Mar 02 2012
Guest
166 Thumbs Up

Core & Shell M&V

Hello, I have read thru the previous posts and responses, and hope this is not a redundant question. I am working on a C&S major renovation. We are going to follow Option B from IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. Vol.3. I will need to monitor the ECMs we have included in the system design. At this point we are targeting chillers with VFDs, variable primary pumping, cooling towers with wet bulb tracking, and high efficiency condensing boilers. I believe I only have to monitor the electric usage, but like to verify how best to monitor the equipment usage. Is it possible to monitor the main power feed to the chillers, monitor the pumps as a whole, the power feed to the boilers, and cooling towers? Thank yuo in advanced!

1
3
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Mar 02 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

Are those the only energy efficiency measures implemented in the project? If there are any interactive EEMs that affect the energy use of other systems (like lighting or envelope improvements) you will need to use Option D.

2
3
0
Randy Cook Associate Director, The Rock Brook Consulting Group Mar 02 2012 Guest 166 Thumbs Up

Because we are dealing with a C&S major renovation project, the tenant lighting and the building envelope are not being targeted with ECMs.

3
3
0
Marcus Sheffer LEED Fellow, 7group Mar 02 2012 LEEDuser Expert 46345 Thumbs Up

The envelope is exactly the same as code? If not it affects HVAC and the savings must be verified. Option B is almost never used on new construction or major renovation projects but it is possible.

The point is in a major renovation project of any sort you have to verify the savings from all of the EEMs. If those are all the EEMs then Option B may apply.

There are not specific monitoring requirements in the IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. under any of the options. You will need to measure what you need to verify your savings projection tool. Sounds like you will have to monitor more than electric if one of your measures is condensing boilers, so gas usage of the boilers as well.

The question to ask is based on how you are projecting savings, what data do I need to gather to verify the savings? Do you have pre-renovation data to compare against (and is the comparison valid) or are you using an energy model or engineering calculations or a combination? How did you generate the projection of savings you are trying to verify?

So basically the monitoring need is dictated by the savings projection method and budget (i.e. what is the cheapest way to gather the data you will need).

I know my answer is kinda vague and full of more questions but so is the IPMVP!

Post a Reply
0
0
Susann Geithner Global Sustainability Manager Predictive Service
Dec 15 2010
LEEDuser Member
12140 Thumbs Up

ASHREA Simulation vs. actual building operations

When we enter the calculated consumptions from EA P2 into the EA C5.1 LEED Online form, can I than use other values, which are based on actual building operation and performance?
We deal with a lot of projects in Europe, which are usually very different from US projects. LEED and ASHRAE requires us to calculated our buildings different than they actual operate or perform, which results in high deviations. For instance the requirement for cooling in all spaces even if it's not, natural ventilation with operable windows, automatic exterior blinds (Software often can't simulated that), chilled /heated concrete slabs, reduced plug loads(less than 25% process load), demand controlled ventilation or other measures, which we often do not simulated, because of all the hassle related to exceptional methods or simply software limitations.
My questions is: Can we use other values for each user's consumption and if so is it up to us to determine a reasonable approach for the simulation of actual building performance?

1
3
0
Gordon Shymko Principal, G. F. Shymko & Associates Inc. Dec 21 2010 LEEDuser Expert 1157 Thumbs Up

Your question covers a lot of issues, but in general the intent of M&V is to ensure that the building is performing as projected/expected. This inherently means that there must be performance projections, usually in the form of energy simulations. (Otherwise, how do we determine which design strategies are effective and which are more in the realm of wishful thinking?) While LEED and/or ASHRAE impose certain parameters on the process of comparing the performance of a Proposed building to a baseline, the form of the Proposed building simulation for the purposes of M&V is really not constrained by these parameters. In fact, it could be argued that it shouldn't be if the primary objective is to truly validate the projected performance of the Proposed. So, while it is true that ALL energy simulation software packages suffer from limitations to varying degrees, it is usually possible to develop "workarounds" for many of the issues. Often it is simply a matter of devising creative ways to model a condition using the basic capabilities of the software e.g. scheduling ventilation to mimic DCV based on expected occupancy. At the other end of the scale it may be necessary to develop custom simulation functions or combine simulation tools, such using the output from a specialized CFD analysis to schedule space conditions in a more mainstream simulation package. And, bear in mind that many apparent software limitations turn out to be inconsequential if fully considered from a first-principles perspective - which in many instances is why the "feature" was left out of the software in the first place. While energy modeling will never be perfect, in my experience very seldom is it impossible, one way or another, to generate results that are a defensible projection of building performance.

BTW, the 25% process load in LEED is only a default. You are entirely free to use a higher or lower value provided that it can be justified.

2
3
0
V Miller WSP Mar 21 2011 Guest 628 Thumbs Up

Looking through the IPMVPThe International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) provides best-practice protocol for measurement and verification of new construction. This standard is referenced in LEED's measurement and verification credits. document it appears that credit EA 5.1 has nothing to do with the energy modelling required in EAP2/C1. Under option D: Calibrated Simulation, it talks about comparing a baseline energy model (which is autosized) and based on a real weather data file over the M&V period, with an 'as built' energy model with actual design capacities/values etc and then comparing the both of them to actual metered readings. Is this correct? If so, then you do not need to enter in any energy use information into the 5.1 submittal for C&S and New Construction projects because the project is not monitored yet. Is this correct? or have i missed something here? thanks in advance

3
3
0
Gordon Shymko Principal, G. F. Shymko & Associates Inc. Apr 24 2011 LEEDuser Expert 1157 Thumbs Up

EAc5.1 does in fact start with the energy models produced for EAp2/c1. The Proposed model as submitted for certification should represent the as-built building. The model is then calibrated through the M&V process as described in my response below to Robin Williams Heeks. With respect to providing the actual energy use as part of the EAc5.1 submission, you are correct - that is simply an error in the on-line form.

Post a Reply
0
0
Xavi B
Dec 13 2010
Guest
2408 Thumbs Up

Calibration to actual energy use??

Hi, I don't understand why the reference guide is asking to calibrate the as-built simulation model to the actual energy use. In a new construction there is no actual energy use yet, unless you document the credits months after completion and occupancy. This makes sense to me for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems., but not for NC or CS.What is exactly a calibration of the simulation? Would it be OK to compare against the as-built energy modeling? If I understand correctly the intent is to compare actual usage to predicted usage, so energy modeling should be fine, right??
Thanks

1
7
0
Robyn Williams Heeks Tise-Kiester Architects Dec 13 2010 Guest 347 Thumbs Up

Re: Calibration to actual energy use??

Without knowing exactly where you are looking in the reference guide, I believe the intent of the word "calibrate" is to coordinate the design of your project's metering system / Measurement and Verification Plan with your energy simulation model. In other words, if your energy simulation measures plug loads and lighting loads separately, these values should also be tracked separately in the actual building's metering design - so the design intentA written document that details the ideas, concepts, and criteria that are determined by the owner to be important to the success of the project. can be verified. As regards the "as-built" language, can you provide a page reference?

2
7
0
Gordon Shymko Principal, G. F. Shymko & Associates Inc. Dec 13 2010 LEEDuser Expert 1157 Thumbs Up

"Calibration" means adjusting the independent variables in the energy model to suit actual conditions. This includes variables like weather, hours of occupany, occupancy densities, and equipment/system operational schedules. After these adjustments are made the model is re-run, and the calibrated results are compared to the actual energy use of the building over the one-year M&V period. This comparison occurs at the system as well as whole-building level. Significant deviations between the actual and projected energy use are then investigated and reconciled/resolved. While properly conducted energy modeling can be surprisingly accurate, it is not perfect and some deviations can be expected. My guidelines for what constitutes acceptable correlation are as follows:

+/- 10% for total annual energy use
+/- 10% for total annual energy use for each energy source
+/- 15% for total monthly energy use
+/- 15% for monthly energy use for each energy source for any month with use higher than 30% of the peak month
+/- 15% for end-uses on an annual basis
+/- 15% for end-uses on a monthly basis for any month with use higher than 30% of the peak month

I hope this helps.....

3
7
0
Xavi B Dec 13 2010 Guest 2408 Thumbs Up

Yes, thank you very much, it is clear now. So if I understand correctly, if you have just one meter for the whole building and you have a properly planned M&V plan, and you compare the calibrated energy model with the actual annual consumption you are eligible to earn this credit under Option D, right?

More replies to "Calibration to actual energy use??" on next page...

Start a new LEED comment thread

Dec 21 2014
Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.

Copyright 2014 – BuildingGreen, Inc.