How energy-efficient is your project building compared with the national average for similar building types? If your project building is already performing well, you may only need to document that performance in order to meet the prerequisite. If your building is relatively inefficient, on the other hand, may have to make operational changes or capital investments to make some improvements. Project teams with underperforming buildings may start by performing an energy audit to identify areas of waste, and the best opportunities for improving efficiency. There are a number of federal and regional programs that offer rebates or other financial incentives for energy upgrades, so capital investments may see relatively fast paybacks.
Accessing the Energy Star Portfolio Manager website.
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 are then benchmarked based on source Energy 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.
Thirteen 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.
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.
Continue entering monthly metering data into Portfolio Manager to update the building data.
Closely monitor energy consumption and correct any conditions contributing to energy waste.
Track any changes in occupancy or space uses, if any, to adjust Portfolio Manager inputs accordingly.
Expect no costs for in-house calculations or tracking and minimal costs when using a consultant to complete calculations using provided data.
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:
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.
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.
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.
Excerpted from LEED 2009 for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance
To establish the minimum level of operating energy efficiency 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® Portfolio Manager tool, achieve an energy performance rating of at least 69. If the building is eligible for an energy performance rating using Portfolio Manager, Option 1 must be used.
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 the LEED project building(s). 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 69% of similar buildings (69th 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.
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.
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.
Achieve energy efficiency performance better than the minimum requirements listed above; points are awarded according to the table below.
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.
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.
ASHRAE publishes widely used standards and publishes the ASHRAE Journal.
Complete LEED Online documentation for achievement of EAp2 on a certified Gold LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. 2009 project in Denver, Colorado.
This annotated sample of the LEED Online form demonstrates how to document EAp2 and EAc1.
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.
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."
If our LEED project building is a laboratory space are we required to use Labs21 as our benchmark? I know it's probably the preferred method, but is it possible to use other alternative methods? We would prefer to use Case 2 Option 2b because our lab has made great strides in energy use reductions in the last several years after implementing many efficiency measures, so comparing our current EUI to our historical EUIs is favorable for our situation. If not... then a follow-up question: the Labs21 benchmarking tool seems to have a very narrow peer group for our parameters and it does not seem fair to compare our lab to such a small group of peers and conclude that we are not far enough above the average. Is it possible to broaden our parameters and include other climate zones or other variable to broaden our peer group so that the average seems more like an average? Any other tips for Labs21 are appreciated. The tool is so cumbersome (every time we click back to the input values it's all blank and we have to start from scratch... very frustrating piece of software!). Thank you for your advice!!
I'll give you two responses here, and you should pick the one that's most appropriate for your situation.
First, as far as I know, you are NOT required to use Labs21 to benchmark your project. Originally, (back in 2010), the reason LEED added Labs21 was to offer a simple method of showing LEED compliance for labs. In other words, if a project team had no desire or ability to use one of the other compliance options, Labs21 was available. It was not originally intended as a "straight jacket" that would force any project to use a certain compliance method.
Second, with all that said, I have not done a rigorous search of CIRs and Interpretations to see if LEED has issued a formal ruling on this question. So, if you need that level of certainty, you should perform such a search yourself or submit your own CIR.
My suggestion is that you go with your preference: Case 2, Option 2b. You have a strong case, and all else equal, LEED prefers to give you flexibility and to reward recent performance improvements. You should be fine.
If the building was awarded an Energy Star label in April 2013 with 80 points and now we are submitting for certification in January 2014 (less than a year from being awarded the label).
If we found out that at the end of the PP the current score has been improved and it is now 82 points Can we select the "No Recent Label" and use the new figure and gain the 2 extra points OR it will be flagged as "You DO have a recent Label within the last 12 month from the submittal date and the project should seek the Streamlined Path?
It's your choice. In LEED Online, the streamlined paths are always optional, never required. The intent is to give you flexibility in how you document EAp2, not to force you down a certain path. So, if you prefer to use the standard documentation path in LEED Online to take full advantage of your improved score of 82, that's perfectly fine. No one at GBCI will object; in fact, they will celebrate that you have improved your building!
I have a slight question regarding the start date for tracking the EA performance period.
The project that my team is working on is aiming to apply for the LEED 2009 EB: O&M certification. It is a 275,000 sq.m. retail mall that is currently in operation. Slight renovations have been planned for the current M&E systems, and there will be a newly constructed extension to the building which is approximately 19% of the building’s existing square footage. And the existing building has been operated, and has energy records for over 10 years.
My question is about the start date for tracking performance period of the 12 months for the EA credits. Is it required that we have to wait until the new extension has been fully constructed to begin tracking the energy performance period, or we can start once renovations of the existing building (which is the main building) have been completed?
Provided we have performance tracking has to be done after construction of the new extension is completed, in any case can we start tracking the performance period prior to construction completion? For example, can we make use of the energy records of the existing building (the main building) as a reference?
Thank you. Any comments or suggestions will be very much appreciated.
If you're going to include the addition in the certification application, you would have to wait until that addition was completed and operating like normal prior to beginning the 12 month performance period for EAp2. Otherwise, your energy use would be artificially low if accounting for the addition floor area but not its energy usage.
You might take a look at the Minimum Program Requirement guidance to see if there is a possibility to exclude the addition from the application. In that case you might be able to start the performance period earlier.
Hi, I am working on a multi-tenant office building. One tenant with over 70% of the rented area doesn't want to give their concsumption data. Would this mean that the building can not achieve the prerequisite and can not be certified?
Without their utility information you will not be able to get certification, unfortunately. LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. requires that at least 90% of areas are included in the submittal for multi-tenant building.
Greetings, I am trying to benchmark a medical devices manufacturing facility using Portfolio Manager and LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Option 2B since this facility is not eligible for and Energy Star score. If I'm using 2013 as my performance period I would need to normalize 2010 through 2012 to make my comparison?
Yes, that's right. For Option 2B, you need to compare the performance period year against 3 consecutive years within the past 6 years. You'll also need to normalize the energy use for those historic years. Often, the normalization is done using the production of the facility over the historic and performance period years.
I'm using the DOE EnPI to normalize for production. It gives me the EUI in terms of MMBtu/unit. How do I use that info on the EAc2 Calculator which requires kBtu/sf?
Hi, we are starting a new EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Project and started to look at Portfolio Manager tool.
When entering the values in the Portfolio Manager tool, do you know if you have to enter values for all of the property's use details or you can use default values?
Hi. You may find reading this guide helpful for using Portfolio Manager. http://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/documents/kn/Document/304708/S...
Thank you Eric, it is a very useful guide.
We are working on a multi tenant project and during our performance period the owner lost a large tenant. The tenant loss is not large enough to put the project in jeopardy of qualifying for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. certification, but large enough that the FTEs entered into EStar PM should be altered to obtain the true FTE energy use. Should we average the FTEs over the two years of data that we have in EStar? We have asked EStar this question, it took a very long time to get an answer and the answer did not help. Thank you!!
Depending on the type of project you might find your answer here - http://portfoliomanager.supportportal.com/link/portal/23002/23010/Articl...
here - http://www.energystar.gov/buildings/sites/default/uploads/tools/pm_lp_gu...
or here - http://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/documents/kn/Document/304708/S...
Another EStar PM question...We have a data room in our building. Our plan is to carve out the data room from our LEED certification because it is less than 10% of the GSF of the building, has its own HVAC unit, is managed and paid for by the data room tenant and the tenant is not cooperative in the LEED process. Is it possible to carve this out of EStar PM also and then explain in a narrative to LEED the GSF <10% discrepancy or do we need to use Case 2 of EAp2/EAc1? It is my understanding that EStar will no longer allow data room exceptions. Thanks for any assistance!
I don't think you can just ignore the area.
Try looking here - http://portfoliomanager.supportportal.com/link/portal/23002/23010/Articl...
We are working on a medical center in Mexico to be certified LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. and it is currently under construction. We would like to advice the contractor on which systems need to be installed before completion so when the building is under performance period no major renovations are required.
Can anyone confirm the level of 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). required for all energy uses? The current scheme that is being built has BMS for HVAC and all electrical systems, plus the utility meters for all electricity and gas consumption. Can anyone confirm if to comply with EAp2 and EAc1 if further submetering is required, for example lighting, equipment, pumps, hot water , etc will need to be separetaly submetered to comply with the criteria?
"System-level metering is in place for at least 40% of the total expected annual energy consumption of the building, and that at least one of the two largest energy-use categories or building systems are metered to an extent representing at least 80% of total annual energy consumption for that category or system. metering and recording systems must be permanent and operate continuously. In order to qualify as continuous, meter readings must be taken automatically at least every 15 minutes."
Eric thank you very much for your answer, it looks like sub-meters would need to be in place to monitor 80% of total annual energy consumption in addition to the HVAC one, therefore if you agree we would recommend 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 lighting, fans, pumps and domestic hot water, it is interesting that in the Energy Portafolio Manager only monthly total energy consumption seemed to be required.
Utility meters would only provide readings every time they are recorded, not automatically, could you please also confirm the source of your information?
Hi, I can't recommend any path to go forward without reviewing the project in more detail, but it sounds like you're on the right path. The information I posted is from the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. reference guide and a successful EBOM project review.
The strict answer to your question is that measurement of the electricity, gas and other primary energy utilities to the site (district heating, generator fuel, etc.) is sufficient for EAp2 and EAc1. Eric is giving great advice that will result in a better building that is easier to certify and now is certainly the best time to add additional submeters. His language is from EAc3.2. Following his advice will also make it much easier to create the energy use breakdown required for EAp1.
Everyone should have to do a little of their own work to get to the answer. I assumed the important part of the question was about extra cost for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. points later.
I am working on a LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. project that does not qualify for a Portfolio Manager rating due to the fact that lab space makes up more than 10% of the building area. The alternative path for this building involves using the Labs21 energy benchmarking tool located on the I2SL website. However, every time I attempt to access the Labs21 tool at http://labs21benchmarking.lbl.gov/ the page never opens. Has anyone else been having this issue?
Eddie, perhaps the URL has changed? It seems to be at http://www.labs21century.gov/
IF our project was awarded an E* label on April, 2013 we then have till April, 2014 to submit and still use it. However, what should our PP for EAp2 and EAc 6 be?
When you qualify for the streamlined path, the designation of the performance period isn't really important for EAp2. Like you described, the timeline shifts to having the label awarded within 12 months of the application submittal date. Given that, I would just assign the performance period end date on the prerequisite form to match the rest of the credits. For EAc6, the performance period end date should fall within 30 days of all the other credits and the credit documented accordingly.
Thanks so much for the info. Should the earliest PP start date listed on the Pl form align with the earliest month of utility data entered in Energy star? Or should does it not need to? Our Energy * label was award in April, 2013 but the months of data used for that label where July, 2011 - July, 2012. So does my earliest PP start date on Pl from need to be July, 2011 or should it align with the other credits? The other prerequisites/credits go from Dec, 2012 - August, 2013 (but that is not a full year and Pl form requires a full year for the PP).
I would just align it with the other credits for the 12 months preceding.
I do have a follow up question:
If we were awarded an Energy Star label in April 2013 with 80 points and now we are submitting for certification in January 2014 (less than a year from being awarded the label).
If we found out that the current score has been improved and it is now 82 points Can we select the "No Recent Label" and use the new figure and gain the 2 extra points OR it will be flagged as "You do have a recent Label within the last 12 month from the submittal date.
Any thoughts on whether WE HAVE TO use the streamlined approach?
I work on a tenant building -- each unit has it's own electrical and water meters - no other utilities are used. We plan to install a building level metering to record the overall energy usage of each apartment and the building overall. Sub-metering not possible. Are we still ok with the requirements for EA P2. Thanks
You will need a whole-building meter to meet the requirements of this prerequisite. So once you install this meter and gather 12 months of whole-building energy use, you then will be available to receive LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. and this prerequisite.
does anyone know, whether energy data used for the Energy Star Portfolio Manager rating have to be based on monthly summaries or if they can also be submitted as quaterly or annual summaries.
We know from the Energy Star Portfolio Manager that there is no longer the 65 day limit on entering energy meters to generate an Energy Star rating. But does the GBCI also accept energy data summarised quaterly? The Reference Guide only states that "a full 12 months of continiuous measured energy data is required". But the LEED Submittal Tips talk about "monthly energy use summaries" which confuses us.
Has anyone experience with this issue, found a clarification or has handed in quaterly or annual energy use summaries?
Thank you very much
The energy data used for Energy Star Portfolio Manager does not need to be based on monthly summaries and in fact should be based on the actual usage dates - this is extremely important so that your score is normalized based on climate data.
One example that I would use to confirm this approach is that we have many projects that have emergency back-up generators. However, these systems only use energy in one-time events, so we only enter use during these times. And this has historically worked.
Let me know how else I can help
Hi all LEEDusers,
has anybody experienced a project supplied by district hot water but the units were in 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.? The ES Portfolio Managers accepts only 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. units for District Hot Water and I am not sure how to convert kWh to BTU.
Thank you for any suggestions.
Thank you Eric. I found that conversion as well but I was not sure if there is some difference in terms of energy type (hot water, electricity..).
I think the input options includes GJ.
There is a possibility that in the 12 months of the Performance Period, during the first six months not obtained satisfactory results provided the measures and strategies to achieve the minimum score proven by consumption bills, and in the following months is managed to obtain satisfactorily according to the prerequisite minimum percentage.
Or we should we take into account the performance period must begin strictly from the first month of verified satisfactory results with consumption bills.
I believe your question is whether *each* of the 12 months must meet the minimum Energy Star score or whether they only need to when combined into a whole year. The answer is the second - Energy Star, and thus LEED, look at all 12 months taken together when determining compliance. Thus, if your score based on your most recent 12 months is high enough to pass the threshold, then you comply with LEED.
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, etc.
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.
I agree that an energy model would be overkill in this situation. In general, yes you can use linear relationships to adjust the EUI of your existing building, because under the hood ENERGY STAR itself also uses linear relationships to generate scores for ratable buildings, and EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. relies on ENERGY STAR as much as it can.
But you must still use good judgment when adjusting your EUI. A 20% increase in floor area would generally lead to a 20% increase in energy use, but only if the new addition was of a similar usage type as the original space. For space type changes, you should compare typical EUIs of the old and new usage types from 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, as they usually are quite different. And scaling for the # of occupants is complicated - it depends on whether the extra people are in new, dedicated floor space, filling pre-existing but un-leased (and thus unoccupied) floor space, etc.
We are currently evaluating an off-grid hospitality project in Mexico. The project is primarily powered by a 32kW PV array which is sometimes supplemented by a propane generator. Except for the propane receipts, we are obviously not getting any utility bills. My first inclination was to simply add the 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. produced by the PV inverters to the propane consumption. However, in cases where the PV array was actually producing more than what is needed, this number would be higher than actual building consumption.
My second inclination was 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. all building systems (and not included generator/PV array inputs). Can anyone confirm that this would be an appropriate approach? Does anyone have experience with off-grid projects pursuing this credit?
I believe your second approach is reasonable, and in fact, I believe your first approach is also reasonable since it is conservative at times when it is not accurate (i.e., during months where PV produces more than the building's consumption needed). So, if you use approach #1 your building's EUI, although not technically accurate, is overstated, and thus its # of LEED points would be understated. I believe this should be acceptable to GBCI, though you should submit this in 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 if you need to be 100% sure.
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? I'm assuming I can because there are multiple blank lines for spaces types on the calculator.
Has anyone tried this in the past?
Yes, you are correct - you should break these spaces out by floor area in the calculator. The blank lines are in there for exactly this purpose.
However, do keep one nuance in mind - you should break out the space according to the overall function of that part of the building, and avoid too much granularity. E.g., don't break out "kitchen" as a separate type, rather, since kitchens are always auxiliary to some other function, lump the kitchen floor area in with the broader usage category that aligns with most users of the kitchen, like "office" or "classroom".
Having worked on a LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. project in Helsinki, Finland, where we were unfortunately not able to fulfill one of the prerequisites (EAp2), motivated me to dedicate my bachelor's thesis to this particular topic. It is my intention now to create a "guidebook" on how to successfully implement those prerequisites, which are the most challenging in projects outside the US.
Is there anyone who would be willing to share his/her experiences with me over Skype or telephone interview? I am particularly interested in experiences regarding the implementation of prerequisites in projects outside the US.
I would very much appreciate any help and I will of course share my findings with you, too!
We are working on a manufacturing plant in Mexico that began operations in 2011. Our performance period has began in May 2013 and will end in December 2013 (therefore we will have 3 years of energy information at the end).
The plant has changed process lines and products along these past years so we are performing a normalization.
To follow Case 2 Option 2B, do we need to have three years of data previous to the performance period to create a baseline?, or
Should we normalize a baseline considering the first year of data (2011), or two years of data (2011, 2012) to normalize the "baseline" and then compare that data with the performance period energy consumption?
We will appreciate any help.
For Case 2 option 2 B, LEED EB O&M requires you to baseline using 3 years of consecutive historical energy use data. On Page 160 of the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. ref guide, 3rd para under heading, CASE 2, OPTION2: Alternative Score, it states..."Option 2B ... requires energy performance data for a minimum of 3 years (in addition to the current year)". Also on Page 161, 2nd para, it states, "The 3 years must fall within 6 years of the beginning of the performance period." Since the performance period for energy use is a 1 year duration, the beginning of your performance period would be December 2012.
My interpretation of this requirement means that your building would not have sufficient historical data yet and would need to wait at least one more year to be able to apply under this option. Option 2A may be a better choice, but may not yield favorable results, based on the EUI that the calculator uses as a default. Note that the online calculator uses a default of 213 kBtu/sf for the adjusted Nat'l Avg Source EUI for all "other" type facilities, so your facility would need to achieve at least a source EUI of 165 or better, depending on the percentage of manufacturing to other use.
Does anybody know if projects outside EEUU are elegible for Energy Star Rating?. I am working in an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Project in Argentina and I am not sure if it will be Case 1 or Case 2.
Which case you use depends on the building type, not the location. If the building type can receive an Energy Star rating (office, etc.) then you use case 1, even if the building is actually ineligible because it is not located in the United States.
We are submitting a museum bldg and have had confirmation from GBCI that we can use Case 2 - historical data to compare against. My question is when completing the information under the ASHRAE Level 1 audit, the LEED credit form asks that you provide comparative information for energy use intensity, cost, demand, & savings. Because we have already established that there are no other similar buildings in 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 base, how do you make the requested comparison.
Our facility is a manufacturing plant (43% fill and finish space) with laboratories (8% space) and refrigerated warehouses (40%).
We started the evaluation process to obtain EAp2 compliance and points thru Option 2 case 2, but then we found that is possible to get an Energy Star Rating thru EPI for pharma plants.
Also found that the LABs21 tool may help us but we are not sure if the Laboratory space includes manufacturing (the example of the Labs21 Benchmarking tool mentions manufacturing as one of the Laboratory uses... (can we add the manuafacturing space to the laboratory in this tool?). We were not able to find this definition clearly in their website.
Anyone with this type of spaces that can guide us with their experience? your guidance will be truly appreciated!!
Thank in advance!
Another question... if we get an Energy Star rating thru EPI from Energy Star for Bldgs and Manufacturing Plant... how can we fill ther EAp2 form that asks a rating thru PORTFOLIO MANAGER? This is where the option for Labs may be used?
Thanks for any guidance,
Ramon - if you want to pursue the prerequisite using the pharma EPI tool, it would be best to submit a LEED InterpretationLEED Interpretations are official answers to technical inquiries about implementing LEED on a project. They help people understand how their projects can meet LEED requirements and provide clarity on existing options. LEED Interpretations are to be used by any project certifying under an applicable rating system. All project teams are required to adhere to all LEED Interpretations posted before their registration date. This also applies to other addenda. Adherence to rulings posted after a project registers is optional, but strongly encouraged. LEED Interpretations are published in a searchable database at usgbc.org. to get approval for the approach prior to submitting the project to GBCI.
Also, it looks like the building would only be eligible for the rating under the EPI if the manufacturing portion of the building were greater than 50% so the building might not qualify. Lastly, the Labs-21 option is only available if laboratory space makes up more than 10% of the building area. Otherwise, Case 2 Option 2 would still be an option.
Although I cannot cite personal experience using this approach, I would suspect achieving ENERGY STAR using a pharma EPI would be enough to satisfy EAp2. However, there is no guarantee that LEED will accept this unless you can find formal written approval from them. So I agree with Ben - submitting 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 or LI request is the way to know for sure.
As for the LEED Online form, I would use the "alternative compliance method" option listed at the very bottom.
We’re working on an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Project in Finland (Educational Building) and are about to fill in the Case 2 Calculator for EAp1 (Option1 Tab). We are now wondering what the difference is between the Annual Weather Normalized 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. Intensity and the Current Weather Normalized Source Energy Intensity to be found from EPA’s Portfolio Manager. Can we divide the Current Weather Normalized one by 12?
Can anyone help?
It seems that EnergyStar has changed some of their nomenclature recently, and that may be the source of confusion. Looks like the "Current Weather-Normalized 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. Intensity" actually represents your "Annual Weather-Normalized Source EUI"
See definition from EnergyStar website for "Current Weather-Normalized Source EUI":
"the weather-normalized source energy intensity (kBtu/Sq. Ft.) for the current 12-month period"
Thank you a lot for your quick reply, Ravi.
It seems that now we won't even fullfill the prerequisite. With such a high Weather Normalized 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. Intensity (475.6) we are far, far away from complying with the prerequisite. I don't even understand how this is possible with such a new building and 44% share of renewable energies.
Have you looked at any of the energy audit or commissioning credits yet?
There might be some use of your building out of the normal for "educational" type buildings -- perhaps a lot of computing energy, or educational laboratory spaces?
Thank you for your reply, David.
We havn’t looked into energy audit credits yet but what I can tell already is that our University building doesn’t include any special, energy-intensive spaces; mostly classrooms, offices and a cafeteria. Plus, all computers are energy-star labeled.
What we did figure out though is that the high Current Weather Normalized Energy Source Intensity occurred due to a conversion mistake. Nonetheless it is now, with a value of 145.0, still too high to meet EAp2.
Does anyone have experience in using a local benchmark for projects outside the U.S.? And by comparing the “normal” Reference Guide with the one including the Global Alternative Compliance Paths it’s not clear to me whether or not we have to use the Case 2 Calculator. Any hints?
I really appreciate your help!
I am not sure about international projects with regard to the EAp2 Case 2 calculator unfortunately.
Two things I would suggest looking into however:
- What is the baseline or median EUI against which you are comparing. In many cases, when you put "Other" space-type into Portfolio Manager, you are given a baseline or median EUI around 94.0, whereas the off-line LEED calculator will generate a reference EUI based on the square footage of each space you have: classroom, office, etc.
- If you are trying to "self-normalize" your EUI based on occupancy or other weather data you have, there is an EPA document entitled "Guidance for Normalizing Environmental Performance Results" from 2004 that outlines options for normalizing other operating characteristics.
Hope this helps, I apologize for not having more information regarding international projects.
Thank you for your help, Ravi!
Well, Portfolio Manager uses 144.0 as National Median Source EUI for the Space “Other-Education”. The offline LEED calculator uses for the same space type a value of 115. With our Current Source EUI of 145.0 and with 70% educational space out of the total area; we won’t meet the prerequisite.
What I’m still wondering about is this “National Median Source EUI” Portfolio Manager as well as the Offline Calculator is comparing to. “National” refers to the U.S.; so it’s comparing the energy performance of our project building towards U.S. buildings. And I don’t really see how that makes sense since it is freezing cold in Finland most of the year, so heat consumption is huge. And it’s also very dark the whole winter, so I assume we use more electricity for lighting etc.
Phew; this all seems so complicated to me.
I suggest reading the following to better understand the energy benchmarking methodology of Energy Star - Portfolio Manager Overview- Technical Descriptions for Models Used in the Rating System This document provides detailed information on the methodologies used to create the energy performance ratings including details on rating objectives, regression techniques, and the steps applied to compute a rating.
You could try getting in touch with the people who worked on the Intelligent Energy Europe project Energy Performance Assessment of Existing Non-Residential Buildings for a benchmark building http://www.epa-nr.org/22.html the report on Finland can be found at the link provided.
thanks for the additional information. I read through the different documents and it confirmed what I knew from an Energy Star support employee already; the 2003 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. (on which most ratings are based) didn't include any international facilities. So the benchmark of our project building is relalised towards buildings of that type in the U.S.. Or as the staff member of Energy Star explained, the benchmark shows how a Finnish building would operate in the U.S. under Finnish weather conditions.
In my eyes this still doesn't make sense when the requirements of EAp2 are to compare the project building's energy performance to the NATIONAL average.
Thanks also for the last link; I will try to get in touch with someone who worked on the Intelligent Energy Europe Project.
Energy Star accounts for differences in weather via HDD and CDDA measure of how hot a location was over a period of time, relative to a base temperature. In this report, the base temperature is 65 degrees Fahrenheit, and the period of time is one year. The cooling degree-day is the difference between that day's average temperature and 65 degrees if the daily average is greater than 65; it is zero if the daily average temperature is less than or equal to 65. Cooling degree-days for a year are the sum of the daily cooling degree-days for that year..
"HDD and CDD are common measures that reflect the heating and cooling requirement of a building, relative to the average temperature. These variables are included in the EPA regression analysis. By including these variables in the regression analysis, EPA can estimate adjustments to reflect the typical relationship between HDD and 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. and between CDD and energy intensity. In most rating models, HDD and CDD are determined to have statistically significant impacts on energy use. Therefore, they are included and adjusted for in EPA ratings."
While using Energy Star to benchmark the energy performance of buildings isn't perfect; it is currently the most robust and statistically valid method I've seen. If you look through the data at the link I sent and compare it to 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. you'll understand.
If you want to compare your building to the education buildings listed in EPA-NR Survey: National context and need for instruments May 2005 (I'm not sure how or what this number includes; see page 3) the average Finnish education building uses 229 kWhm2.
Thank you for your quick reply, Eric!
the regression analysis itself makes sense to me. Just the fact that Portfolio Manager then uses the results to compare it to U.S. buildings is confusing in my eyes since EAp2 requires the comparison to the NATIONAL average.
Anyways, I'll try to figure out a way to use a local benchmark.
Principal, LEED Consulting
The Cadmus Group, Inc.
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 2014 – BuildingGreen, Inc.