After having documented your project building's energy performance for EAp2: Minimum Energy Efficiency Performance, EAc1 will require you to focus closely on improving operational performance and, in some cases, upgrading to more efficient equipment. Use your energy audit results from EAp2 to develop your strategy. Identify and implement no-cost and low-cost opportunities to reduce energy consumption, such as changing heating and cooling set points by one or two degrees and reminding occupants to turn off lights and office equipment when not in use. Capital investments may see relatively prompt paybacks because of reduced utility costs and the likelihood of incentives through federal or regional programs.
All project teams are required to use EPA’s Energy Star Portfolio Manager to track a minimum 12 months of data for all energy consumption. The data is then benchmarked based on source EnergySource energy is the total amount of raw fuel required to operate a building; it incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses for a complete assessment of a building's energy use. Use Intensity (EUI) to show compliance. Source EUI incorporates efficiency factors into an analysis of the total amount of raw fuel (or “source energy”) used to operate the building, rather than using the more limited measure of site energy, which reflects the amount of utility heat and electricity consumed at the building. Most buildings will benchmark through Energy Star and document the prerequisite through Case 1. Those not eligible for an Energy Star rating will use summary data generated in Portfolio Manager in conjunction with protocols provided by USGBC to complete benchmarking calculations and document the prerequisite and credit through Case 2.
Twelve building space types are eligible for Energy Star ratings. Typically, if at least 50% of the building’s gross floor areaGross floor area (based on ASHRAE definition) is the sum of the floor areas of the spaces within the building, including basements, mezzanine and intermediate‐floored tiers, and penthouses wi th headroom height of 7.5 ft (2.2 meters) or greater. Measurements m ust be taken from the exterior 39 faces of exterior walls OR from the centerline of walls separating buildings, OR (for LEED CI certifying spaces) from the centerline of walls separating spaces. Excludes non‐en closed (or non‐enclosable) roofed‐over areas such as exterior covered walkways, porches, terraces or steps, roof overhangs, and similar features. Excludes air shafts, pipe trenches, and chimneys. Excludes floor area dedicated to the parking and circulation of motor vehicles. ( Note that while excluded features may not be part of the gross floor area, and therefore technically not a part of the LEED project building, they may still be required to be a part of the overall LEED project and subject to MPRs, prerequisites, and credits.) (excluding parking lots and garages) is classified as one of the following space types, the project is eligible and must use Case 1:
To ensure national comparability, climate data is used to normalize energy consumption to compare the project building to similar buildings in similar climate zones, eliminating potential regional variations. However, it may be easier in certain regions to improve a building’s efficiency based on city or state policies. For example, savings achieved through energy-efficiency improvements may qualify your project for state and local utility incentive programs. Ask local utility providers about incentives and rebate programs.
EAp2 and EAc1 require that you keep close track of your energy consumption for at least 12 months.
The updated Case 2 calculator (see resources section) uses Labs21 to facilitate benchmarking for buildings with laboratory spaces. The calculator includes specific directions to walk you through the process.
Yes, international projects that are comprised of ratable space under Energy Star must still pursue the EAp2/EAc1 via Case 1.
Generally, it is not possible to benchmark multiple buildings as a single entity on Portfolio Manager for Case 1 or for Case 2. Each building must be separately benchmarked as a standalone entity according to either Case 1 or Case 2 depending on the space type associated with each building. USGBC’s Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Projects is a good resource to reference in this type of scenario.
The first step is to enter the building and associated space characteristics on Portfolio Manager to see if the building is eligible for an Energy Star rating. If it is, you go with Case 1 and if not, go to the Case 2 calculator. Energy Star has published additional guidance for mixed-use buildings that is a great resource in this circumstance.
In this case it is a good idea to (1) reach out to Energy Star directly to determine if the structures should be benchmarked as a single building or two and then (2) reference the LEED Supplemental Guidance to the Minimum Program Requirements. If it is still unclear after those two steps are taken, it’s also a good idea to communicate with USGBC directly to confirm the best approach.
In order to use an Energy Star label for the streamlined path, the Label must have been awarded within 12 months of the LEED application submittal date. For example, if you receive label award notification from Energy Star on March 5, 2012, you can use the score associated with the label as long as you submit your application to GBCI on or before March 5, 2013.
Process loads generally may not be excluded from the building’s energy use for benchmarking purposes. However, depending on the appropriate compliance path, you may be able to normalize the energy use from process loads based on the relative activity level of the building operations. For example, if the building is a manufacturing facility, part of the benchmarking process will involve normalizing energy use based on the relative output of the facility. Use of CIRs in the case of special benchmarking for buildings with process loads is recommended.
For the LEED submission, provide a summary of submetered energy use for the project building along with the utility bills for the campus. Include a narrative summarizing the sub-metering approach and explaining the difference between the utility bills and the submetered energy use data included on Portfolio Manager, which commonly includes a spreadsheet showing the deductions from the total consumption used to show the energy attributable to the project, or how submeter readings for each separate entity add up to the whole reflected in the utility bills.
If you have a space that is submetered, is under separate management, and does not support the typical operations of the remaining portions of the building, this space may be excluded from the prerequisite.
When applicable variables change during the performance period, these changes must be recorded on Portfolio Manager to ensure accurate benchmarking of the building. When making updates to the space characteristics on Portfolio Manager, make sure to select “update” rather than “correct” and note the date when the updated space characteristic was first true. By selecting “update” the change in the building characteristic is only counted for the appropriate portion of the performance period rather than the whole thing. For example if 20% of the building space becomes vacant half way through the performance period, update the vacant space on Portfolio Manager so that the building was 100% occupied for half of the performance period and 80% occupied for the other half. In these circumstances, it is a good idea to provide a copy of the “Revision History” for affected spaces along with the prerequisite submittal.
For EAc6, the performance period should fall within 30 days of the latest performance period end date for all other credits and prerequisites. It should not follow the period of the Energy Star label associated with the streamlined path for EAp2.
The number of monitors in the building does not impact the number of computers entered into Portfolio Manager. The value for computers should reflect the total number of personal computers and servers in the office space. For example, if the office space includes 10 PCs, 5 laptops, and 25 monitors, the input for Portfolio Manager is 15 PCs.
For office buildings, if the vacant space is greater than 10% of the building area use the following guidance as indicated in the USGBC Reduced Occupancy Guidance document. For all other space types, no other changes are required for this credit.
Assess current performance and Energy Star eligibility. Benchmark current performance based on the option that applies to the project building. Make operational improvements or equipment upgrades to meet minimum energy performance requirements.
Benchmarking can typically be managed by in-house staff, reducing capital investment.
Review “15 O&M Best Practices for Energy-Efficient Buildings,” a helpful document published by Portland Energy Conservation, Inc. (PECI) to assist facility managers and building owners with basic energy-efficiency issues.
Provide building operators with access to BOMA’s BEEP (Building Energy Efficiency Program) training webinars to maintain regular and effective training for personnel responsible for daily building operations.
Collect energy metering data for a minimum period of the most recent twelve months.
Be sure that information is copied accurately from utility bills, including start and end dates of the statement period, and that you are using actual meter readings as opposed to estimated readings whenever possible. Replace estimated meter readings with actual meter readings once those statements are received. Exporting data inputs from Energy Star and graphing the utility data can help uncover data entry errors through visual comparison.
Energy Star requires precise data to describe the different space types in the building, including the square footage, number of occupants and computers, and other characteristics of daily operations. Careful inventory of these variables will result in a more accurate rating.
Energy metering data may be excluded for up to 10% of the building’s gross floor area if that space is sub-metered and used for an independent purpose unrelated to typical business operations, such as a cafeteria; or used as a computer data center.
LEED defers to Energy Star practices and standards to generate a Portfolio Manager rating or score. Where questions arise regarding this score, review Energy Star technical guidance documents and contact Energy Star customer service to facilitate the process.
If you initially get a low Energy Star score, start your process by identifying no- and low-cost operational changes to reduce energy consumption. If your building is an energy hog, it’s more likely that these opportunities will exist, and focusing on them to start with will help you go the distance. For instance, simply changing heating and cooling set points by one or two degrees and getting into the practice of turning off lights and office equipment when not in use will have dramatic effects on overall building energy use.
Building owners can reduce overall operating costs by optimizing energy performance; many operational energy-efficiency improvements will provide instant or short-term paybacks.
Pursuing commissioning through EAc2 will help identify energy-efficiency improvements, and will pay off particularly well in inefficient buildings.
Many state and federal agencies offer rebates or other financial incentives to companies that undertake energy-efficiency initiatives.
For building types covered by Energy Star but located outside the U.S., use Case 1. Portfolio Manager proivdes a list of non-U.S. locations, but it is not complete. If the location for an international project is not listed, consult ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Appendices B and B to determine a comparable U.S. city.
Provide documentation of the Energy Star rating or certificate award from the EPA.
You must generate an Energy Star score if the building type is listed as an eligible space in Portfolio Manager. Case 2 is not allowed for buildings eligible for Energy Star.
Complete the EAp2/EAc1 Case 2 Calculator to demonstrate the building’s level of energy efficiency.
Use figures generated in Portfolio Manager to complete the EAp2/EAc1 Case 2 Calculator spreadsheet.
If the building type is listed in Portfolio Manager, but is not eligible for an Energy Star score, then you will most likely be able to use the Option 1 of the EAp2/EAc1 Case 2 Calculator. Complete the “Eligibility” Tab of the Option EAp2/EAc1 Case 2 Calculator to confirm which option you should use.
Provide one of the following data summaries:
Continue entering monthly metering data into Portfolio Manager to update the building data.
If determining the Energy Baseline Including Historical Data, the three years of data must fall within six years of the beginning of the performance period.
Closely monitor energy consumption and correct any conditions contributing to energy waste.
If the project building type is not listed in Portfolio Manager, and more than 10% of the building space must be entered into Portfolio Manager as “other,” then you will most likely need to use the Option C calculator. Complete the “Eligibility” Tab of the EAp2/EAc1 Case 2 Calculator to confirm which option you should use.
Track any changes in occupancy or space uses, if any, to adjust Portfolio Manager inputs accordingly.
Industry reports may provide useful benchmarking comparisons and eliminate the need for you to locate three comparable buildings on your own. The International Facility Management Association (IFMA) publishes benchmarking reports that are available on its website.
Expect no costs for in-house calculations or tracking and minimal costs when using a consultant to complete calculations using provided data.
Excerpted from LEED 2009 for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance
To achieve increasing levels of operating energy performance relative to typical buildings of similar type to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with excessive energy use.
For buildings eligible to receive an energy performance rating using the EPA’s ENERGY STAR’s Portfolio Manager tool, achieve an energy performance rating of at least 71. If the building is eligible for an energy performance rating using Portfolio Manager, Option 1 must be used.
Achieve energy efficiency performance better than the minimum requirements listed above; points are awarded according to the table below.
The minimum energy cost savings percentage for each ENERGY STAR threshold is as follows:
Have energy meters that measure all energy use throughout the performance period of buildings to be certified. Each building’s energy performance must be based on actual metered energy consumption for the LEED project. A full 12 months of continuous measured energy data is required.
Calibrate meters within the manufacturer’s recommended interval if the building owner, management organization or tenant owns the meter. Meters owned by third parties (e.g., utilities or governments) are exempt.
For buildings with a primary space type not eligible to receive an energy performance rating using Portfolio Manager, comply with 1 of the following:
Demonstrate energy efficiency performance that is better than 71% of similar buildings (71st percentile or better) by benchmarking against national source energySource energy is the total amount of raw fuel required to operate a building; it incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses for a complete assessment of a building's energy use. data provided in the Portfolio Manager tool as an alternative to energy performance ratings. Projects outside the U.S. may use a local benchmark based on source energy from their country's national or regional energy agency. Follow the detailed instructions in the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Operations & Maintenance, 2009 Edition.
For buildings not suited for Case 2, Option 1, demonstrate energy efficiency performance by determining an alternative rating score using the Portfolio Manager tool to report the building's energy use data from the performance period. Follow the detailed instructions in the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Operations & Maintenance, 2009 Edition.
This option is only available through EAp2. Enter energy use data during the performance period for at least 1 year into Portfolio Manager to determine the “weather-normalized source energy intensity”. Use this value in the offline calculator to determine the percent reduction from the streamlined baseline.
Enter at least 3 consecutive years of historical energy use data into Portfolio Manager in addition to the current year’s data to determine the “weather-normalized source energy intensity” for each year. Use these values in the offline calculator to determine a baseline using the historical energy use data of the project building.
In addition to the historical data used in Option 2b, provide energy use data for at least 3 other buildings with similar uses over at least a 2-year period to determine the “average energy performance of a similar building” in Portfolio Manager. Enter this data into the offline calculator.
Have energy meters that measure all energy use throughout the performance period of all buildings to be certified. Each building’s energy performance must be based on actual metered energy consumption for both the LEED project and all comparable buildings used for the benchmark. A full 12 months of continuous measured energy data is required.
Use the Portfolio Manager tool available on the ENERGY STAR website to benchmark the project even if it is not eligible for an EPA rating: http://www.energystar.gov/benchmark.
Existing building commissioning and energy audits will help identify areas of building operations that are not efficient. Implement energy-efficient retrofits and energy-saving techniques to reduce the building’s energy use. Energy-efficient equipment such as office equipment, maintenance equipment and appliances will aid in the reduction of energy waste. Employ the use of meters on major mechanical systems to effectively monitor the energy consumption of each.
In addition to efficiency improvements, consider renewable energy options as a way to minimize the building’s environmental impact.
A trade group offering publications, process templates and event information.
This EPA document summarizes environmental tobacco smoke research and provides information on national laws targeting the issue.
EPA's system for helping you track and improve energy efficiency across your entire portfolio of buildings.
A helpful guide for use of Portfolio Manager to track energy utility data.
A helpful guide to assist facility managers with best practices for common energy-efficiency issues.
Required reference document for DES systems in LEED energy credits.
Portfolio Manager explains the eligibility requirements for tracking and benchmarking energy use over time in commercial and institutional buildings.
Calculator for LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems., optimizing energy efficiency performance.
IFMAInternational Facility Management Association is the largest international facilities managers' organization.
The Building Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA) has a program called BOMA Energy Efficiency Program (BEEP). BEEP
ENERGY STAR offers free online training to help you improve the energy performance of your organization.
The Energy Star Portfolio Manager Statement of Energy Performance verifies your project building’s energy use intensity (EUI), as well as the national average for buildings of similar usage. You’ll need to submit this, as well as the EAc1 Option B/C Calculator, to show that your building’s energy efficiency is at least 21% better than the national average.
The following links take you to the public, informational versions of the dynamic LEED Online forms for each EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.-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.
Version 4 forms (newest):
Version 3 forms:
These links are posted by LEEDuser with USGBC's permission. USGBC has certain usage restrictions for these forms; for more information, visit LEED Online and click "Sample Forms Download."
This annotated sample of the LEED Online form demonstrates how to document EAp2 and EAc1.
Given our unique project conditions we are pursuing this credit via Case 2, Option 2B. This option allows for normalization of historical energy data for things such as, changes to occupancy, operating schedules, space use.
How do we derive the multipliers that should be used for normalizing our data? One reviewer we spoke to indicated that an energy model was not needed and the calculations could be done much more simplistically. Can we use linear relationships such as twice the number of occupants equates to an assumed 2x energy usage? Or, there was an addition to the building, so would a 20% increase in conditioned space volume equate to an assumed 20% increase in energy usage? And what about less quantifiable aspects like space type changes?
Does anyone have experience with this? Any tips or resources for this endeavor is greatly appreciated! We are trying to get this turned around quickly.
Our project is a mixed use building used by community groups and has several different space types within it (theater, classrooms, event areas, kitchen, offices). Can I break these spaces out on the Case 2 calculator by square footage essentially creating a weighted average for the building's adjusted national average EUI?
Does anyone have experience with this? Any tips are appreciated!
Hello, my project recieved an Energy Star rating of 95 in the prerequisite stage. We have not identified any cost effetive ways to improve this number. Do we need to do another Energy Star analysis for this credit or can we use the same one from the Prerequisite?
Hi Ryan, this credit is one in the same with EAp2. In simple terms EAp2 is the benchmark and EAc1 is how well you do on the ES scale. Congrats on 95 which is impressive. Keep it up and keep your profile updated. Make sure that you are positive everything is completed properly and that the score is legitimate. Good Luck!
we are doing a international project outside US. when we started to prepare for this credit we used the energy star portfolio to get a rating for project building. we filled in all the required information in energy star portfolio and it generated automatically a rating for it. However what bothers us right now is that even though we got a rating for it, it showed a message ** not eligible : Facility must be located in United States and or one of its territories under the column Eligibility for Energy Star in the upper right table named General information
What I undertood from the begninng was that even though the project building was not qualified to apply for a Energy Star certificate due to the fact that it is located outside US, project building can still use Energy star Portfolio for benchmarking and procuring this credit according to case 1 described in the LEED reference Guide for E&B..
Am I still right about this ? Could anyone here confirm me that we can continue to apply energy star portfolio for a rating in line with case 1 no matter where the building is located as long as the building is comprised of ratable spaces. ? I really appreciate if some of you can answer my question!!!!!
It appears as if you can. See the most recent global ACPs here - https://new.usgbc.org/resources/leed-existing-buildings-global-acp-redli...
Thank you for your response.
In other words, is it correct that we can obtain an Energy Star Rating from Energy Star Portfolio Manager Tool (and use it for LEED purposes) without being eligible for an Energy Star Certification?
Also, our project was registered in February 2012 which means that the most recent ACP which you refer to (from July 2012) was not applicable yet. However, they both say case 1 must be used if an Energy Star Rating can be obtained. Correct?
Correct - even US based EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. projects are not required to obtain Energy Star certification.
The way LEED works is projects can always use the latest version and interpretations. They are only required to do so for information released prior to their registration date.
You can use case 1.
Is there a minimum building occupancy % for the 12 month performance period? I am working on an office tower that has slowly increased it occupancy over the last year. I am wondering when we can legitimately start the monitoring period.
Yes, the Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs) mandate at least 50% occupancy over the previous 12 months (55% for hotels) under the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Rating System. You can review a summary of the MPRs here: http://www.leeduser.com/strategy/minimum-program-requirements
Energy Star Portfolio Manager requires that power produced and used on site be included when submitting for an Energy Star rating. (This may be a new requirement as of sometime in 2011; I'm not certain.) But the FAQ section on the Energy Star site says that on site solar power gets a source multiplier of 1.0, which makes it better than utility power at around 3.3 or thereabouts if I recall.
My question is that EA Credit 1 says on site wind and solar are not included in the energy calculations for the credit. Does that mean I should leave out the solar power meter when entering data in Energy Star Portfolio Manager? Or has LEED updated the credit requirements to correspond with the fact that solar and wind are included in Energy Star ratings now, albeit it with a favorable source multiplier?
My understanding is that Energy Star made the update that requires inclusion of onsite solar after the LEED citation you mentioned was issued. Generally, LEED adheres closely/identically to the rules put forth by Energy Star when it comes to benchmarking, and I believe you should follow the up-to-date guidelines from Energy Star for this matter.
We are working on a project in Belgrade - Serbia. Have I understood correctly that an international project is eligible for Energy Star rating but just cannot get Energy Star because it is an international project?
Therefore we can go for CASE 1?
Thank you in advance and sorry for stupid question.
Yes the October version of the rating system indicated that international projects were not eligible to use Case 1 but the November version dropped that exclusion.
Our project is currently pursuing LEED. We received an ENERGY STAR label for the 12-month period ending June 30th 2011 with a rating of 81. We plan to submit for our LEED certification in May 2012. The value that was used on our ENERGY STAR portfolio for that 12-month period for Workers on Main Shift was significanlty higher (7000) than the occupancy FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. count we are going to use on the Project Information Form 3 for our LEED submittal (4000). Just recently, upon beginning our pursuit of LEED, a new occupant count survey was conducted and it turned out to be much lower than the figure on the ENERGY STAR portfolio under which we received a stamped SEP and label. We want to submit our LEED application with the most accurate and up-to-date data however we are nervous that the LEED reviewer may see the difference and flag us for the inconsistency. Should we still submit with our active ENERGY STAR label/score, but use the more accurate occupant count on the PI form even though the numbers will be different? Or, in an effort to remain consistent, should we use the old occupant count (higher than actual occupancy) on the PI form so that it matches our ENERGYSTAR portfolio? Or, should we try an alternative compliance on the EA credit and not submit using the labeled score but another reflecting the new occupancy count? Your advice is appreciated! Thank you!!
It is extremely important that you use consistent (accurate) numbers throughout your LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. application. Reviewers will likely ask questions, if your numbers are not consistent throughout the different credits. Secondly, you can’t use an Energy Star Portfolio Manager score from June 2011 unless your Performance Period ended in June (and in that case you would have needed to submit your application within 60 days). All credits must end within a week of each other (See the introduction section of the LEED EBOM 2009 Reference Guide. You will need to use your current Energy Star Portfolio Manager Score at the end of your Performance Period. Before you say wait, we are not eligible for a new energy star label, LEED EBOM does not require the official label from Energy Star; they require an official score. (The EPA Portfolio Manager website has an option of printing your score for purpose other then an energy star label). I would suggest you input your accurate FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. count into EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manger and see what your new score is. Continue to input your energy use every month. Your Energy Star Portfolio Manager score at the end of the performance period is the information you will need to submit with your application.
Thanks for the comment! I agree the reviewers will likely question inconsistencies in the data, based on review comments we have received on other properties. It is unfortunate that this property is experiencing inconsistencies since they are not intentional. I am confused by your statement about not being able to “use an ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager score from June 2011”. Perhaps I wasn’t clear, this property has already received the ENERGY STAR Label. To meet the requirement of EA Pr2 using the streamlined path, a project building that has been ENERGY STAR-labeled within the 12 months preceding the LEED-EB: O&M application date, can simply “Provide the award certificate, congratulatory letter or similar official program correspondence confirming that the project building earned the label, the date of the label and the performance rating achieved in Portfolio Manager.” One other point of clarification, the window for the end of all performance periods was changed to 30 days in the November 3, 2010 Addenda to the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Operations and Maintenance. As anyone who has worked on an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. project can attest, even 30 days can be a challenge sometimes. Thanks again!
I apologize. I did not recall that in the newer version of LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. 2009 you are now allowed you to use the streamline path of just using your energy star certificate from the previous 12-month period at least for EAP2. If you are trying to earn points under EAC1 to be on the safe side, I would update your energy star portfolio manager with your new accurate occupancy data and see what you new energy star portfolio manager score is. This way you know how many points you can really count on achieving if your occupancy levels are questioned. It sounds like you have experience doing LEED EBOM so I am sure you already know this, but I would highly encourage the project to continue to work on lowering the buildings energy use and improving your buildings energy star portfolio manager score until you complete your performance period. In most cases, conducting and implementing results of retro-commissioning can pay for the whole LEED EBOM project with the reduced energy bills.
Our project is below 5,000sf which makes it automatically not eligible for an ENERGY STAR rating. There are two distinct space types, office + K-12 classroom. Based on this information, the project team is required to use option 1 from the offline LEED calculator. The calculator determined the combined benchmark source EUI to be 179.
This is where I get confused, or the math part of my brain is not working today. The project team is striving to reach a target of 35% better than the benchmark. If I calculated this, the project building should aim for a target of 116 ( 179 *.65). The calculator, on the other hand, determined the project building should be 86. I'm scratching my head on this....Does the calculator take into account other variables?? Thanks.
The calculator is set up to show the percentile change in consumption, not percent reduction, which is why it seems like the math isn't working. Energy Star, and the Case 2 calculator, both work on the use of percentile points.
If you imagine a bell-shaped curve distribution, the distance between one percentile point on the curve and the next varies depending if you are near the top, along the steep sides, or down in the tails. Which means you can't just calculate the percent reduction (where the EUI difference between a reduction 35% to 36% is the same as from 36% to 36%) and have it equal the same amount of change in the percentile points.
Which is a confusing way to say that if you want to set a target EUI for your building, decide on the percentile you want to hit, and then adjust the EUI input in the calculator until is shows that you've hit your goal.
Is there a resource that further defines the activity space types as listed on the Case 2 LEED Offline Calculator and thier respective Source EUI's? Specifcally is there a defintion of how these space types are defined/categorized and a explanation as to where the national average data is compiled and calculated?
Yes the most complete set of data is the CBECSThe Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) is a national sample survey that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floorspace is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural, so they include building types that might not traditionally be considered "commercial," such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. CBECS data is used in LEED energy credits. Database. This is what Energy Star Portfolio Manager is based off of. There you can find and inventory of what you are looking for. Here is the link. Hope this helps.
Thank you for the info. I understand where CBECSThe Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) is a national sample survey that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floorspace is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural, so they include building types that might not traditionally be considered "commercial," such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. CBECS data is used in LEED energy credits. and Energy Star Portfolio Manager get their data. My question is where the USGBC's Case 2 LEED Offline Calculator obtains its data as it does not exactly match the CBECS data. Specifically I would like to know where the Case 2 Calculator's space types are defined and the rationale behind the calculator's national average EUI's are further detailed/explained. Can anyone provide this data? Any info helps.
Being that my project is a convention center, it does not qualify for energy star. Therefore, I am using the EAp2 Case 2 offline calculator in conjunction with the EPA portfolio manager tool online. Option 2B Historic Data appears to apply to us since we have already compared our facility with 5 other convention centers. The result of that comparison were not helpful since they were all approx. 300 EUI less, due to all being previously LEED certified. My question is: how do I go about fulfilling option 2B? Upon inputting the EUI for the last four years, the offline spreadsheet continues to say N/A for the "Approximate percentile above National Average."
Jessica, we are working on a convention center as well and taking this approach. Your best bet is to not use LEED certified facilities. Have you joined the working group on Energy Star? Can we take this conversation offline, we have been through the ringer on this credit because of the data and calculator. Please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. Look forward to talking with you
We are working on projects for LEED EBO&M and have some doubts related to the credits EApre1& EAc1. The Portfolio Manager Analysis is unable to classify the energy consumption of the plant within the standards of buildings. Thus, the use of a spreadsheet according to LEED is also unable to classify the energy consumption. Therefore we have some questions to ask you:
1 - Is it possible not to consider energy spent for the industrial process and utilities, considering only energy spent for building´s systems (HVAC, elevators etc)?
2 - If option one (1) is not possible, can we consider the energy consumption per unit of production (for example, kWhA kilowatt-hour is a unit of work or energy, measured as 1 kilowatt (1,000 watts) of power expended for 1 hour. One kWh is equivalent to 3,412 Btu. / kg produced rather than kWh/m2)?
3 - We would also like to know if is it acceptable to use Energy Star Index for industrial plants?
Hi Paola, not sure how much my reply will help you but seems like your issue right now is "pre-LEED". I would start with Energy Star as it has pretty strong support when it comes to industrial facilities. I would reach out to email@example.com directly on best practices and strategies how to correctly benchmark.
Once you have cleared that up, visit this LEED user area again and check out the offline calculator in the documentation toolkit section. You may end up having to use this if the facility cannot earn an Energy Star score.
In the Case 2 Option 2 tab for the offline calculator the cells are locked up on the option III enter current year EUI score as far as I can tell. I have downloaded the calculator from USGBC and LEEDuser and it does the same thing. The cells are protected.
Anyone else have any problems with this before?
I think I understand what you're describing and have encountered it before when I use the calculator to establish a historical benchmark. Unfortunately, due to the spreadsheet being locked and us not being able to see the macros, I often have to complete many of the cells under in the first options to the best of my ability in order for the correct cells to fill in under the other options.
I hope this helps.
This is an industrial manufacturing facility, and we have filed our data online with Energy Star as Other-Other. We have the 3 years of historical data, but really feel like it's unfair to be compared to anything else at this point because few facilities like ours have tried for LEED, so the data is limited and other building types likely don't use the same amount of energy.
So 3 questions:
1. In the offline calculator under "Elgibility" it asks are you one of 3 categories and one of those is "other". If yes then choose option 1. The next question ask if you are anything other than the above options. If yes then choose option 2. It seems ridiculous to have 2 "others" so how do we differentiate between choosing option 1 and option 2?
2. Because comparison data is so limited for our facility type does anyone have any experience or knowledge about options for this credit? We were thinking about designing our own baseline and comparing against ourselves from the past.
3. Does Case 2 Option 2 (3 years of historical data) still compare against other building types that are similar to you or does it allow you to compare to yourself?
We have an industrial property we're working on and while we haven't completed certification yet, I can share our approach.
1. If 10% of the building (by square feet) is classified as 'Other' in Energy Star, use Option 2. One catch, Laboratories are considered Other by Energy Star but not by the USGBC.
2. We're planning to use the historical approach. Additionally, I have contacted other facilities to ask if they would share their energy information. Those that return my calls have not been willing to share that information.
3. We read Option 2 as the historical data for the subject property.
Hope this helps,
I understand the 12 mos tracking time period can start before the performance period begins but it must also include the performance period. What if your project's performance period is longer than the minimum 3 months, are you required to input energy data into Energy Star Portfolio for the entire performance period?
My project's performance period is 7 months so I'm wondering if I'm required to only track the minimum 3 months or will I be required to track the full 7? Thanks.
I actually found out the same project above earned an ENERGY STAR rating of 88 for a 12 mos time period ending August 31,2010. Since Aug 31st 2010 is less than a year from the application date (July 1st 2011), this project is eligible to select "streamlined path" on the LEED online form.
Therefore, when I fill out the performance period start and finish date, do I enter the 12 mos time period from the ENERGY STAR label certification form? The documented performance period for this project does not begin until October 1 2010 and ends April 30th 2011. So, technically the ENERGY STAR label does not represent the building's energy consumption during "LEED's performance period". I'm a little confused about LEED's requirements for this situation, can anyone clarify this for me. thanks.
You are correct that if you are submitting with the streamlined path, the label must have been awarded within one year of the LEED application data. The date the label was awarded is the date on the award letter from Energy Star. The LEED application date is the Submit Review Date on the Timeline tab on LEED Online.
As for the performance period, when using the streamlined option, the performance period doesn't really matter because it takes a back seat to the other timing considerations listed above.
LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. v2009 allows you to skip the SEP submittal if you share your Portfolio Manager facility directly with the USGBC review team. The book and LEED Online direct you to share with Portfolio Master Account: "USGBC - LEED_EB:O&M". When I attempted to share with this account, it didn't exist. "USGBC - LEEDPERFORMANCEREPORTING" did, so I shared with them. Does anyone know if this is the right account to share with? -Thanks
The review team immediately commented on submittal. The account that building should be shared with is:
"GBCI - LEED_EB:O&M"
The LEED O&M reference guide states that two points are available under EA Credit #1 for projects that follow Case 2 Option 2A however the LEED online template does not award credits under this option.
Additionally, the LEED O&M reference guide states that seven points are available under EA Credit #1 for projects that follow Case 2 Option 2B however the LEED online template allows up to nine points.
Which is correct, LEED online or the LEED reference guide?
I checked the current reference guide addenda on the USGBC website and it does not address this issue.
Thanks in advance for any insight that can be provided.
The offline calculator includes this note: The initial 2009 Reference Guide misstated the Streamlined Approach point maximum.
I think it's safe to say that you probably have a version of the RG with this problem, and the form / offline calculator is more accurate.
We have established a rating for the building based on Case 2 Option 1 - beacause the building is not eligible for an Energy Star rating. Based on last years energy data the EA Credit 1 Case 2 calculator indicates a level of 35 above the national median (13 pts), but it looks as if the calculator is based on US national mean data. Would you consider the calculation reliable for a Saudi 2009 office building?
I almost certain the calculator uses US national Median data; how this might impact the international aspect of your project I am not sure. You might want to consider normalizing energy use for climate region and compare your building's energy intensityThe ratio of consumption to unit of measurement (floorspace, number of workers, etc.) Energy intensity is usually given on an aggregate basis, as the ratio of the total consumption for a set of buildings to the total floorspace in those buildings. Conditional energy intensity and gross energy intensity are presented. The energy intensity can also be computed for individual buildings. to those in the American Southwest.
We are working on a unique facility (production greenhouse) which based on my understanding of EA Pre1 Cr2 can only meet this prerequisite using Case 2 options B--historical data and C- benchmarking; as it does not meet the requirements under Option A generic benchmark of Other.
We have gathered appropriate benchmarking data, but as the facility is part of a campus, in which sub-meters were not originally installed when the project was built 3 1/2 years ago we do not have 3 years of historical building data.
Subsequently sub-meters have been installed, and we have 1 1/2 years of building energy data, we also have 3 + years of campus wide historical data. However it looks as if we need three years of historical building specific energy data in order to fill out portion B of the Case 2 Calculator, and cannot use part C unless we have B finished.
Is there precedent for using only benchmarking data when historical data is not available? Has anyone ever encountered similar issues and developed solutions that GBCI/USGBC will accept? I seem to recall precedents in previous O&M version CIRs that exempted historical data if sub-meters were installed.
Thanks for any insights!
Marc, In my experience there are some case when allowances are made for a lack of historic data, but this would need to happen through the CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide process.
Hello Marc & All,
I have a similar situation with two other buildings that are not eligible for energy star (one is a sports arena, the other is an airport terminal). They both are part of larger complexes with a master electric meter and only started 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). recently. Their is the streamlined Option 2A, but in that case you are compared to the national average "other" buildings, which is not a good comparison for these high-use facilities. So having three years of historic data is a requirement, but it's not clear why, as in the case of these non-ratable buildings it just makes them wait for eligibility for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. without really making the process of measuring their energy consumption any more robust. In fact, if they wait until year 3 to improve energy efficiency, they would score better. Shouldn't they have the incentive to improve energy efficiency as soon as possible, and then to submit as soon as they want?
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
The project we are working on is a 170,000 SF plus vitamin manufacturing facility with over 10% laboratory space. It does not qualify for an ENERGY STAR rating given too much "other" space. Therefore, we have to use the Case 2 Calculator, which dictates we must use Option 1 for Laboratories and must compare to other lab facilities using the Labs21 Benchmarking tool. There is no guidance for using Labs21 in the reference guide, in the offline calculator, or on Labs21's website. My question is, what does USGBC/GBCI allow us to compare to on Labs21? This makes a huge difference for what the EUI comparison is given if you compare to all types of labs the average is much higher than just those in the specific climate zoneOne of five climatically distinct areas, defined by long-term weather conditions which affect the heating and cooling loads in buildings. The zones were determined according to the 45-year average (1931-1975) of the annual heating and cooling degree-days (base 65 degrees Fahrenheit). An individual building was assigned to a climate zone according to the 45-year average annual degree-days for its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Division., of which, for us, there is no comparison building. If anyone has any experience with this I would appreciate a response. Thanks.
Good news Jennifer - the folks at Labs21 have produced a draft guidance document that I think you will find very helpful. I have actually applied their methodology on a number of labs and it seems quite sound.
Hope that helps
This is our first time to handle LEED-EB+OM, most of our projects are under LEED-NC, thus we don't understand the EA credit 1-Optimize Energy Efficiency.
Here's my question:
1. Is Title-24 related to EAc1 from LEED-EB+OM requirements? If so, how can we apply this?
2. What is the baseline of 71% EPA Energy Star performance rating?
3. How can we increase the percentile to get higher points?
4. what is EPA's Energy Star's Portfolio Manager tool? Where can we access this?
Appreciate any inputs/clarification on this requirements.
Here are some comments on your questions:
1. It is my understanding that Title 24 is applicable to new buildings only, so it would not be applicable for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems..
2. 71% baseline is compared to 71% of all like buildings on a scale of 1-100, so 71 is better than anything below it with 100 being the best. Definitely visit www.energystar.gov and do the Portfolio Manager overview for more information on this.
3. You will have to increase building energy efficiency to increase your percentage and then wait for that efficiency to show up through tracking of utility bills - the easiest thing is more efficient lighting. Isn't a huge investment and shows up right away. Commissioning also can contribute to energy savings. Note that they can't be projected, have to be actually measured with Portfolio Manager.
4. Portfolio Manager is an Energy Star tool to track performance of existing buildings. You can read more about it here http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=evaluate_performance.bus_portfolio... and create your login to start benchmarking.
Hope this information is helpful.
Thanks jennifer for taking time to respond.
Here's my follow-up questions:
1. So, T-24 will not involve for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. projects? The type of our building is warehouse/museum for storage of collection cars, non-insulated, low efficient AC and half of the roof is already using PV system.
2. If i access the portfolio manager energy star, where should i start?
3. what kind of tool is that to increase builidng energy efficiency? Can we play around the data from this system to increase the points?
Thanks in advance.
Susan, my $0.02.
1. New building codes like T-24 don't really have any bearing on EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. projects, since EBOM focuses on actual consumption as indicated on utility bills. They only relationship is that theoretically buildings designed to a stringent design code will perform better than national average, and therefore should theoretically fare well in benchmarking via Portfolio Manager (of course, this is not actually always true in reality).
2. If you are a first time user of Portfolio Manager, you might want to spend some time on the web site reading the how-to guides, review the Licenses Profession Guide to Energy Star (http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/evaluate_performance/pm_lp_guide.pdf), or Google for free webinars on the benchmarking process. There's a lot of information out there to help novices.
3. If you are used to design modeling tools, the Energy Star approach is going to seem strange to you. It's not intended to identify the best opportunities for improvements in a specific building, but rather show how you are doing based on actual data. Once you enter the data, you will be able to see how close or far away to a target performance you are, and then would need to devise which strategies are most pertinent in your situation to make progress towards that target. An energy audit, commissioning, investigating utility rebates for upgrades, etc are typical next step. If you monkey with the data to artificially raise your score, the LEED reviewers will notice and it will cause you trouble.
Yesterday USGBC posted posted key guidance for your project if it involves a district energy system. Here is the info from the LEED Resources and Tools page:
District and Campus Thermal Energy Treatment - Initial release of guidance for implementing LEED Energy & Atmosphere prerequisites and credits for existing building projects connected to a district or campus thermal energy system. Includes coverage of both LEED 2009 for Existing Buildings: O&M and LEED for Existing Buildings: O&M 2008.
Please discuss below what you think of the new guidance, and what questions you have about DES for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems..
Overall this is good and makes a lot of sense. There are some specifics that are good to have spelled out instead of each team coming up with a methodology of applying renewable energy for example.
One question I have is what about WEc4 for Cooling Tower Management? I think some credit should be given if the DES is managing their water well, but that is not covered in this document.
Good point. If that comes up on a project I'd encourage you to query USGBC about it.
FYI for those who were confused about the two sources from USGBC related to DES. This is a response from GBCI....
"The guidance on page 4 in the more recent document, Treatment of District or Thermal Energy in LEED for Existing Buildings Operations & Maintenance, should take precedence in this case, although following the original approach from page 218 of the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Operations & Maintenance, 2009 Edition, would also be acceptable and would better respond to the intent of the credit, especially in the case where no other base building systems use refrigerants.
If you are attempting this credit prior to clarification of this matter, you should include this correspondence with your submittal."
We are certifying a building in a campus. The campus as two commercial kitchens, one being in the building we are certifying. Typically, only the kitchen in the project building is used for all food operations for the entire campus.
Do we include all natural gas consumption in the benchmark? If so, does this not inflate the consumption of the project building to beyond what it should be? Can we split it in half if we know that at least half of the use is attributable to operations in the other building?
Alexa - this is sort of an unusual situation, so I don't know of any precedent. However, my suspicion is that you would not be allowed to split the gas use in half for the benchmarking purposes. Usually a kitchen that is part of an office building that just serves the occupants would be classified as the main space type (office). In this case, maybe you would be allowed to classify that space as Other: Food Service. The benchmarking allocates different EUIs to different space types based on the size and other variables, so presumably if this kitchen is serving another building in addition to this one, it is larger than if it just served the project building. I would suggest asking this question directly to Energy Star, since it's a bit unusual and you'll want to be certain that you are handling it correctly.
Thanks for your help Jenny! We have asked USGBC/GBCI instead. Energy Star was not able to give an answer as to what might be accepted for LEED.
Alexa - I actually think this might be fairly simple. The building sounds like a Case 2, Option 1 candidate which will allow you to create a weighted national average source EUI based on the square footage of the various space uses in the building. The fact that the commercial kitchen portion of the building serves other buildings on campus doesn't actually matter - the CBECSThe Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) is a national sample survey that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floorspace is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural, so they include building types that might not traditionally be considered "commercial," such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. CBECS data is used in LEED energy credits. data provides a national average of a wide variety of kitchens operating with widely varying hours, capacity, and product. It's part of the beauty (and clumsiness) of that tool. But from an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. perspective, you probably wont be able to control for production. I guess if you wanted to make the case that your kitchen is radically more productive than most (on a per SF basis) then an alternative compliance path might be justified, but I think that the standard path is probably where you'll end up. I'll be interested to hear if USGBC agrees!
My project is a Cookies and Potato Chips facility (from a well known brand) I has an offices building, services, laboratories, and Production Lines. It was built and operates since two years ago outside the US. It has great green features. The problem is that no similar facility exists on Portfolio manager to get a performance rating. I requested information to Energy Star and they responded:
"It seems that your facility would be classified as "Other - Other." Please note, if your entire facility is listed as any of the "Other" space types, it is not eligible to receive a national energy performance rating"
¿Does this means that this facility is not certifiable?
I would be really appreciate any answer.
Project types which do not qualify for an Energy Star rating (Case 1) can use Case 2, Option 1 or Option 2 (A, B, or C) as appropriate. The details of these methodologies is found in the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Reference Guide.
One thing you'll need to be particularly careful of, Jose, is the possibility of normalizing your energy consumption for variations in production. With a manufacturing facility (or partial manufacturing), changes in output can have significant impacts on energy use - normalizing for those changes is the only way to analyze efficiency. You may also want to look into identifying sources of comparable building data - industry or trade associations are one possibility, or public consumption surveys like those produced by the Energy Information Administration. It's a challenging building type, no question about it, but definitely do-able in EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems..
I have a LEED EB project coming up, the building is a pretty efficient building however i am having trouble with the operating hours for this building. There is only one State Tenant in the building and their operating hours according to the Energy Star's requirements are probably only 45 per week. The average operating hours for an office building according to the EPA is 57. They will probably never meet energy star without spending a fortune because the operating hours are killing the calculation. Has anyone had experience with this, is there a unconventional way of calculating operating hours that I am overlooking, or are there any recommendations I can look at? Thanks.
In my experience, there's not a ton of wiggle room...simply the "number of hours during the week the building is 75% occupied." With such short operating hours, maybe there are large opportunities to save more energy by looking closely at set points and schedules?
I knew that all the credits and prerequisites should have the performance period of 3 months except EApr2 & EAcr1 which is required minimum of12 months energy consumption data. And the performance period may extent maximum of 24 months. My doubt is whether the 12 months data should be after the Registration of the project or may be before the registration of the project also. If our building operation has started 6 months before and we have the energy data for that then shall we able to register my project now and can we able to apply for certification for my project after 6 months (before registration 6 months + after registration 6 months) . Could anyone help me to overcome this issue?
Ramesh, the 12 months of data can extend before the project registration date—not a problem.
our building is really old (way older than me), contains ACM's, masonry walls with no insulation, construction of a by-gone era...... it seems unfair to compare it with EnergyStar (CBECSThe Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) is a national sample survey that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floorspace is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural, so they include building types that might not traditionally be considered "commercial," such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. CBECS data is used in LEED energy credits.) database (those are predominantly modern era buildings). Plus, it has a combination of spaces unlike about any building I have ever seen. USGBC could argue that it is 50% office (by sf), but it only gets to 50% if all common spaces (closets, corridors, restrooms) are lumped into "offices". Who's to say those spaces serve only the offices in the building (in reality, those common spaces also serve the assembly, labs, other non-office spaces where people work in the building). We thought about the alternative approach of finding three "comparable" buildings, but we are not confident in what USGBC thinks "comparable" means - and we don't really think it's likely we could find anything comparable. The owner has made great strides in improving efficiency since about 2002; unfortunately, USGBC wants data no more than 6 years back (per the reference Guide). Changing envelope and major HVAC upgrades are really not feasible due to construction and (encapsulated) ACM's on airhandlers and ducts; so there is little more they can do to upgrade for energy efficiency that won't "break the bank".
We want to go for a CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide and ask exception to having to compare on Energy Star, ask exception to finding a comparable and, instead, be judged strictly on our own history of improvement since 2002 (gas and electric is all metered through local utility and all records are kept monthly). What do you all think our chances are? any advice?
When I do presentations on LEED and LEED GBOM for local trade orgs in Cinti, I often tell folks not to be discouraged if you have an old building - If I don't get "thumbs up" on this CIR, I may have to eat my words.
Having done some word-eating in my day around EAc1, I know where you are coming from. A couple of thoughts that may be helpful - My experience is that the USGBC/GBCI and Energy Star are very closely aligned on the issue of historic buildings. They generally conclude that the age of a building is not relevant to its energy efficiency rating. Obviously, age affects energy efficiency itself, but Energy Star (and by extension, LEED) are not designed to compare buildings adjusted for age - they just compare buildings based on space uses. So frankly I'm not optimistic for you on that point. On the space use issue, I think you've hit on a challenging aspect of Energy Star, which is allocating common spaces to various space uses in the building. And here I think you are right to take a common sense approach - if a given corridor serves only assembly spaces, it should be included in that space use. On the other hand, if it serves both assembly and office, you might use a square-foot weighted average to distribute the corridor SF between those two space types. Hope that helps a bit.
Quite often the data does not back up your assumption that an old building uses more energy than an new one. In my experience just the opposite is true.
A significant improvement complinace path for this credit has been included in the draft of LEED 2012 which should be out for public comments soon. I am told that this method has also been proposed for inclusion in the pilot credits for LEED 2009 projects. So look for it there.
As usual with USGBC activities it is difficult to give you any timeframes however.
I second Marcus's comments. In fact, a favorite past time is poking around the CBECSThe Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) is a national sample survey that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floorspace is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural, so they include building types that might not traditionally be considered "commercial," such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. CBECS data is used in LEED energy credits. microdata, which shows pre-1950's buildings to be the most efficient age class in terms of EUI.
The space classification does sound like a challenge, but even if you can reassign the corridors, you still might not be eligible for Case 2, Option 2 (or Option C for v2008). This is the path that allows historic or comparables into the benchmarking. I would recommend sitting tight as Marcus suggests to see what changes are afoot...they may help you out quite a bit.
Commissioning or auditing can improve identify a range of energy-saving measures.
Implementing energy-saving measures a directly helps achieve the desired Energy Star rating.
Ongoing commissioning can lead to added energy savings over the long term, improving the Energy Star rating further.
Use of a BAS can inform operational changes contributing to energy goals.
Accurate energy-use data supports assessment and implementation of energy-efficiency measures.
If increasing ventilation levels, consider the likely increased energy consumption.
Efforts to improve energy efficiency can affect occupant comfort, in good and bad ways. Monitor comfort along with any energy efficiency measures.
Use the Energy Star Portfolio Manager statement of energy performance to help achieve EAc6.
LEEDuser is produced by BuildingGreen, Inc., with YR&G authoring most of the original content. LEEDuser enjoys ongoing collaboration with USGBC. Read more about our team
Copyright 2013 – BuildingGreen, Inc.