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.
You may use the LEED v4 version of this credit on v2009 projects. For more information check out this article.
This credit has an alternative compliance path available for the use of ISO 50001: Energy Management Systems. For more information see Pilot ACP 86: LEED 2009 EBOM ACPs for ISO 50001.
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."
I am analyzing a 40 story vertical mixed use tower for LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.. It is split 50/50 between office and condos-both under separate ownership, management, and metering. Based on supplemental guidance for MPR #2, LEED allows to define the project boundary as a partial building (basically excluding the condos).
My questions are:
a) Can we submit a partial building for energy star?
b) Can we submit the whole building Energy Star score for LEED?
I'm a little confused by how you worded your questions. Can you clarify your intentions here: for a) do you want a full ENERGY STAR certification (the plaque), which has its own review process separate from LEED, or just a score for your project?
Also, you mention "partial building" in a) but "whole building" in b). I would not recommend using different methods for ENERGY STAR and for LEED. Is that truly what you meant to ask?
If you can clarify this for me I'll address your overall questions.
There are four buildings that are leased by the State and one of the buildings currently has 25% if it as a Data Center. They will be removing the Data Center in June and I would like to know how to classify this building in Energy Star? Shall I just assume the Data Center is gone already and get a low score, that will change in June and go up or change the classification halfway through the Performance Period and consider it an upgrade? I will have to delete that part of the building and increase the Office Space footage at that time and I don't know if the new data will have to start another twelve month period?
The most accurate thing is to change the classification at the time when the data center is changed. You can edit the spaces in Energy Star...just use the edit feature and make sure to classify the change as an "update" (not a "correction", which presumes you used the wrong value initially and want to apply a new value to the entire benchmarking period). Energy Star uses the update information to adjust benchmarking based on the portion of the 12-month period where one value was true versus another.
In general, I think project teams overlook the fact that most multitenant buildings will have occupancy or space changes over the 12-month benchmarking period, and these changes should always result in an update to Energy Star inputs. It's a good idea to upload the space revision history in your LEED application to help reviewers see the adjustments you made over the course of the PP.
I did a basic walkthrough and counted the computers and people for the Energy Star data calculations and some questions came up.
1.) It was a Friday, so I expect the number of employees was down. Anyway, the Energy Star number fluctuates very easily and I can get a better score by just adding ten people. How acceptable is this? I cannot get a true number of employees from the State Tenant (too busy) so I am forced to make an assessment.
2.) The number of PC's really affects my Energy Star score as well. I want to be clear when I am counting so I need clarification on:
a. The number of PC's - does that include one hard drive and one monitor or if there is one hard drive and two to three monitors, do I use the monitor number?
b. Many of the employees were using laptops and I am assuming this number fluctuates. Do I guess on that number and add it to my PC total?
In closing, I feel like Energy Star scores are easily increased by increasing the number of people and PC's and so there would be room for inflated scores. I also feel like the people inputing the information, should have some credentials behind them, and it looks like this isn't required of either LEED or GBCI. Your thoughts?
Energy Star is a system to "normalize" all buildings in a certain type/category. It normalizes based on occupants, equipment and weather. Energy Star can be a helpful tool, but garbage info in = garbage info out.
LEED will not penalize you if you do your best to make an educated assumption on people and computers. We tend to assume 1 computer per person in an office setting. Those with two monitors are offset by those with laptops. Consider counting people on a per square foot basis if you are unsure of the exact numbers.
With regards to your last question about Energy and credentials:
For LEED you are allowed to enter in your own information into the portfolio manager. However, to be Energy Star rated officially, you will need to have the documents signed and submitted by a licensed professional. If you get above 75 points you get the Energy Star Plaque. Licensed Professional are bound by ethics laws.
I appreciate your information. I have noticed a lot of "pressure" from building Owners to just "put in" the information to get the credit - drives me crazy! I think integrity has to be number one and if we as AP's cannot be honest, then there's a problem! We are all our own LEED Police - I am glad there are Licenced Professional requirments for Energy Star and GBCI (although not for this prerequisite- yet).
So, to clarify the number of computers. If I noticed one person with one hard drive, three monitors and two laptops all going at the same time, I would input five PC's for that one person? I saw this more often than not.
That sounds like 3 computers to me. The Hard drive and two laptops pair to the 3 monitors, but use your judgement. What type of office is this that each occupant needs that much equipment.
The four buildings of 24000 sf each are all leased by the CA Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation. By the way, I know Larry quite well and have hired Glumac for two of my other projects - small world!
Thanks for your input!
Michelle - I would second Dylan's valuable comments and also note that the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. review process is designed to include cross-checks for many of the variables that go into Energy Star. The number of PC's is a tough thing for a reviewer to verify (they would certainly question a figure that differed significantly from the number of occupants), but in terms of the number of occupants, an inflated figure for Energy Star would have to be similarly inflated for WEp1, SSc4, your occupant comfort survey, etc... In addition, a wary reviewer might even count the workspaces on the floorplan to confirm the rough accuracy of the figure. Which is my long-winded way of saying its a lot of work to misrepresent occupancy in EBOM, and it is much more valuable to take the time & effort at the beginning to get accurate occupancy figures. From what you've said about the clients unwillingness to readily share those numbers and pressure to cut corners on this prerequisite, it sounds like you will have your hands full with this one!
Hope that helps,
Does anybody know what's LEED position about laboratories benchmarking using this tool?
I'm working on a lab certification project (EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.) and since our lab ratio is more than 10% of our gross area, we're not eligible for energy star rating. Using Labs21 tool seems to be the most apropriate way to benchmark us. Any similiar experience to share in here?
I think that the short answer is yes. The updated EAp2 Case 2 calculator here http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=221 walks you through the process of using Labs21 to benchmark in conjunction with the Case 2 calculator.
There is some more information about using Labs21 for LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. here http://labs21benchmarking.lbl.gov/.
The Labs21 approach works very well and is indeed the preferred compliance path for buildings with a significant amount of lab space. Take the time to be sure you fully digest the full definition of the various space type and area variables Labs21 uses - things like Lab Area Ratio and operating hours can have drastic impacts on your analysis, and defining your spaces accurately can save heartache down the road. The 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. sort is also somewhat counterintuitive, in that its an either-or situation rather than making smaller adjustments. But overall, Labs21 is a great resource and works with EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. very well.
Hope that helps,
Thank you all for answering!
I was a little confused about LEED acceptance when I was first introduced to LABs21. In their guidance it's written that "USGBC previously issued a credit ruling allowing the use of the Labs21, but that it does not apply to projects applying under the newer rating system".
After that I got in touch with USGBC and they told me that "The LEED Green Building Operations and Maintenance 2009 guide does not discuss LABs 21 benchmarking".
I was positively surprised checking the link Ben sent me in his reply (thank you!) showing a path from USGBC for using this tool. So, it's seems we're in the right way.
When I try to benchmark with Labs21, no results show up. Instead there is a small line that says: "Dataset Search retrieved no data". I tried again, selecting all boxes on the metrics criteria page to cast a broad net. Still no data. Could it be my climate (subarctic)? What now?
This is a ~7,000 gsf building with ~1,800 sf "labs", ~1,500 sf offices/conf. rm., ~3,000 , and ~2,500-3,000 sf residential. The rest is mechanical, storage, circulation, etc. I put "labs" in quotes because I do not know yet if they will "require 100% outdoor air".
It's almost certainly your 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. - I suspect Labs21 doesn't have many labs from that region in the database. Include all climate zones in your next benchmark attempt (rather than just the zone you are located in) and you should get plenty of results. There are plenty of labs in there in your Lab Area Ratio grouping.
Hope that helps,
Dear Experts, does anybody know, if I can use the "Case 1" of EAp2 (using Portfolio Manager) or not? The Project is located in Germany and registered at 2011 October, 21th.
The rating systems has changed in October 2011 with ACP rules, but there is no general ruling about ACP's abailable.
It would be very helpful, fy anybody can help. Thanks a lot. Tobias
Presuming that your project meets the basic requirements for Portfolio Manager, you can use Case 1. I have recently clarified the language regarding the application of the new ACP and they are NOT MANDATORY. We can continue to use Portfolio Manager for international projects - the ACP offers a new alternative.
You can go to this link where the USGBC confirmed that international projects are eligible to use Case 1 - http://www.leeduser.com/topic/international-projects-alternative-complia...
The important part is below.
"Thanks for your question about EAp2 and EAc1 for EB projects outside of the U.S. The language stating that Case 1 was not available to projects outside of the U.S. was erroneously included in the Rating System with ACPs. The case IS available to projects outside of the U.S. and the box stating otherwise has been removed from the Rating System."
Michael, Eric, thanks a lot! Finally I've received a official answer from the gbci:
"Thank you for contacting the Green Building Certification Institute. We apologize for any confusion on this matter. Your project team is able to show compliance with EAp2 through Case 1 - Projects Eligible for Energy Star Rating."
Hope that the rating system will be updated asap to avoid more confusion in this matter...
Best regards from Berlin, Tobias
Glad to hear you got through to the GBCI. The USGBC has new feedback forms for international projects and it might be useful to let them know about the confusion being created by not updating the documents accurately.
I understand the USGBC is going to have workshops with the international roundtable members to try and resolve some of the small, but very annoying, issues we have in Europe.
I have a caveat--I'm actually just discovering this now so I don't know whether there is an immediate solution, but Energy Star is requiring me to have a licensed engineer or architect to sign a statement in order to generate an energy star rating. All the architects and engineers on this project are licensed with international licenses. None of us have a US license. So I'm not sure how this will have to be sorted out. And since we just have 2 weeks to complete all the data and submit, and it requires the statements to be mailed in, again I'm not sure if we can manage this in time. I may figure this out myself within today but if anyone has advice, please comment thanks!
Melissa - You shouldn't need a PE or engineer to generate an Energy Star rating; the PE stamp is required if you are seeking to earn an Energy Star label, which is a step beyond the rating. You can document your Energy Star rating simply by generating a 'Statement of Energy Performance' via Portfolio Manager. Having a label (formal approval of your Energy Star rating by the EPA Energy Star folks) streamlines the documentation required for your EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. submittal but it is not required for EBOM.
Hope that helps,
Dan, I'm grateful for your reply. I'm afraid I need some more hand-holding. I had already generated the SEP, but it seems to be nearly blank. While the project page on line shows a rating of 95, the SEP Energy Performance Rating is N/A, and there is no 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. rating either. Of course I will need the energy intensity to complete the LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. application. I've got 12 months of meters input, here are no "alerts", I've shown 100% of coverage by meters so I'm stumped. Any ideas?
Dan, a cheerful update. There was a very odd solution. Though I'd uploaded a year's worth of data, I had to request a summary for the year ending in January, not February. I don't know why, its less than 12 months. But my rating 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. popped up. Discovered this quite by accident. Anyway your comments were helpful.
This question is specifically about taking info from Portfolio Manager and putting into LEED online v.3. My project building is not eligible for Energy Star because it is an office building that is less than 5000 sq.ft. I completed the eligibility tab on the EAp.2 case 2 Calculator and it looks like we fall under Option 1. So I also completed entering energy data for 12 months into Portfolio Manager and printed out the Statement of Energy Performance. Do I then take the number from Statement of Energy Performance under "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." heading for "Source" and put into Section IV of calculator where it asks for "Project Building's 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. Use Intensity" or do I use the number listed under "Energy Intensity" heading for "Site"? I can not find an explanation of these numbers on the Portfolio Mgr website. It makes a difference in whether my project complies with pre-req or does not. Thanks!
Rather than using the Statement of Energy Performance, I would set up a new "view" in the Facility Performance area of the building on Portfolio Manager that includes the building's 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. Use Intensity. This value may be slightly different than the one that shows up on the Statement of Energy Performance.
Don't use the Site Energy Use Intensity.
Also, it's a good idea to include a screenshot with your submittal documentation highlighting the 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. use intensity on Portfolio Manager.
Thank you Ben for information. Unfortunately, using my building's 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 for the past year, we do not meet requirements under EAp1 Option 1. We made HVAC change and added insulation mid-year last year, so my only hope is that those changes will result in reduction of energy used as we proceed through this year. If I don't meet minimum requirements using Option 1, am I allowed to use Option 2? If so, do you know of best place to find help with using Option 2.
Janna - I'm pretty sure that you have to stick with Option 1 in this case. Option 2 is only triggered if more than 10% of the space is "All Other - Not Classified" or "Service". Hopefully you can pick up some efficiency with the new changes.
Our building is located in Egypt. It is a training facility specialized in IT programs for post-graduates and it is not eligible for Energy Star Benchmarking and the national average 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 are unavailable. Our building is considered new as it is only occupied from 2 years. I do not know which option under EAp2 to follow. Since our building is located outside U.S., we have only four options to follow (2b, 2c and ACP option 1&2). The issue is we do not have historical data for the building for 3 years as it is only occupied from 2 years. The 3 years historical data is required by option 2b and 2c. For ACP option 1, it requires to benchmark against national average source energy data from the national energy agency which are not available. If national average source energy data are unavailable, then we have to follow ACP option 2 which requires to benchmark against the energy data for at least three comparable buildings which is extremely hard to get in Egypt. What am I suppose to do?
It seems like your understanding of the options is correct though not that promising. The only other option would be to propose an alternative compliance path through a project specific 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..
I think Ben is exactly right - when all the existing options are exhausted, the onus is on the project to propose an alternative compliance path that meets the intent of the credit. That may be rather difficult, or it may require meeting a standard of performance that feels particularly challenging (for example, comparing your facility to similar facilities outside of Egypt, if you can find data for those). But its up to you to formulate a reasonable alternative and convince GBCI that your approach is valid - the project-specific 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. is the right way to do this. Good luck with it.
Has anyone entered November energy data in Portfolio Manager and looked at the score? I hope you weren't counting on the energy points your project had before November.
"New National Median Benchmarks
Effective November 7, 2011, EPA will introduce new National Median performance targets within Portfolio Manager. The median value represents the middle of a distribution: half of the buildings have better energy use intensity (EUI) values while the others have worse EUIs.
The new National Median performance targets will replace the National Average values that are currently in Portfolio Manager. That is, for all instances where a national average is currently displayed, the value will be replaced with a National Median. EPA is making this change because the National Median has been determined to be a better benchmark point of comparison for existing buildings."
Always good to print out a "Statement of Energy Performance" before any changes to Energy Star Portfolio Manager are scheduled to occur.
If the period of performance is finished before the change and you take print screens of the portfolio manager data it might work out. The issue with the change from mean to median is that it appears for many of the building types the energy performance is harder by at least 24%. That's potentially a huge difference in resultant points for the same energy use. I'm all for accurate benchmarking, but I don't like the rule change in the middle of the game.
I noticed that the Case 2 Calculator has not been updated since the November Portfolio Manager update. Will buildings still be benchmarked against the average source EUI (instead of median source EUI)? We have a customer building in the entertainment/culture category and if we go by the case 2 calculator, which has an avg. source EUI of 265 to benchmark against, the project gets 15 or so points. If we benchmark against the median source EUI of 94, which is now in Portfolio Manager, the project doesn't even meet the EAp2 pre-req. Which should we go by?
We are working on a retail/catering facility that we cannot currently certify as NC because the addition we are doing is not large enough to qualify. However we cannot go for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. certification right now because the renovation is too big to qualify. We would like to certify the building in a few years under EBOM once the renovation is done and we can qualify. Right now we are trying to calculate what the energy requirements will be for the EBOM 2012 version for our building, so that we can design within those guidelines to facilitate certification. The 2012 version offers 3 pathways for energy calcs, but I don't think we qualify for any.
1. Energy Star Score - we are not elegible for a score due to our mix of space typologies.
2. Benchmark again Typical Building - The DOE websites says that due to budget cuts they are not doing the CBEC Survery this year. Can we use an old survey?
3. Demonstrate Energy Efficiency - This would require us to wait three years after construction of the renovation. Not only that, it would require us to show a 20% energy improvement over that time period. This creates a weird incentive to design the building really inefficiently so we can show progress - not something we are interested in proposing to the client.
Any thoughts, we are at a loss as to what sort of 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. standard we should be shooting for...
My first suggestion here is that you confirm your project is unable to certify now in either NC or EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. because of renovation / addition activity. That would be unusual, as LEED v2009 does not intend to exclude projects in your situation. Have you reviewed the current MPR guidance and rating system selection guidance to be sure?
If you stick with v2012 then I recommend Option 2. The reason is simple: Option 1 references ENERGY STAR, which in turn references the "current" 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, which happens to date back to 2003. Option 2 in v2009 also ultimately references the 2003 CBECS. If CBECS is not updated soon then LEED will have little choice but to continue referencing the same CBECS version it does now, i.e., the 2003 data. I would expect this to apply to both Option 1 and Option 2 in LEED 2012.
So, although there are no guarantees, I believe your safest bet is to stick with #2, and select an EUI target relative to CBECS 2003.
Hello we are a LEED-EB O&M V3 Certified Project and are planning a major remodel of our existing building. Including Re-Location of entire existing central plant. We are planning to replace all Chillers, Cooling Towers, Primary Circulating Pumps, Heating Hot Water Boilers, and all auxilary related equipment. If this is the case, what happens to our existing LEED-E.B.O&M V3 Certification? And more importantly what happens to our awarded Energy Credit Points? Does the new Central Plant now become the new Baseline for Energy consumption measurements? What can we do in the meantime to prepare for this possible change?
Chief Build. Engineer
You are still a LEED Certified Building. When you go to re-certify under EB-OM, your score on the energy credits will be based on the new installation, which I would hope is more efficient than the existing equipment.
If you are undertaking a major renovation in addition to moving the central plant, you might be able to use LEED - NC instead of renewing your EB-OM Certification.
What is considered a Major Renovation, is there a certain square ft criteria ? Because there is going to be a major renovation as well as relocation of central plant.
Do you know what BD-C is with regards to LEEDs
You can see the USGBC's Minimum Program Requirements for LEED NC 2009 here.
You can also see the Rating System Selection Guidance document.
We are experiencing difficulties in acquiring a coherent rating from Portfolio Manager for a Hospital in São Paulo, Brazil.
As we input all the data, PM is giving us a rate of 100, which does not make sense for this particular project. We suspect that it has to do with the occupied areas. Should we factor in bathrooms, staircases, hallways and elevators in the total area of the Hospital? Or PM works with the pure and simple gross area of the facility?
It sounds like maybe it is an area issue if you are only including the regularly occupied areas.
Here is the rule on area measurements, as well as the link the Licensed Profession Guide to Energy Star (which is were the below came from):
"The user-entered value for area must be the gross total area of the building. This value is measured from the principal exterior surfaces of the enclosing fixed walls and includes all supporting functions such as kitchens and break rooms used by staff, storage areas, administrative areas, elevators, stairwells, atria, vent shafts, etc.
Additionally, the following must be noted:
- Existing atriums should only include the base floor area that they occupy.
- Interstitial (plenum) space between floors should not be included in total.
- 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.) is not the same as leasable space. Leasable space is a subset of a building‟s gross floor area.
I have a large high rise with a data center in it. It's last Energy Star rating was September 2010. This year, I am not going to qualify for an Energy Star rating for two reasons: (1) we have had a hellish summer and our 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. is off the charts, and (2) new Energy Star requirements do not allow me to consider my server room as IT energy unless it is sub-metered. So I am about to lose my Energy Star rating. What do you recommend I do if I want to LEED Certify the building? What are my options?
Can you clarify what's about to happen? Is your ENERGY STAR label (plaque) about to expire, or is your ENERGY STAR score about to drop below 69 (the LEED minimum)?
Both. The label is expiring and we will not be able to renew it because the building will not score as well this year.
There are a couple of things going on here, but the bigger hurdle is the IT space. Have you determined if the space meets the definition of a Data Center in ENERGY STAR? A Data Center space applies to spaces specifically designed and equipped to meet the needs of high density computing equipment such as server racks used for data storage and processing. These facilities have uninterruptible power supplies, designated HVAC, and raised floor space.
If your room does not meet the definition of a data center but also has separate cooling systems and different operating hours than rest of the building, the room can be entered as a separate space in Portfolio Manager using the Office space type. In the space details, enter the weekly operating hours, zero workers, and a number of PCs that approximates the number of servers in the space. AND you won't need to worry about 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)..
As for the bad summer, it is important to remember that ENERGY STAR takes into account your building's energy performance by location and climate, so an increase in cooling demands for your building will be normalized according to similar buildings in similar climate zones. Therefore, I'd encourage you to continue to update your Portfolio Manager account monthly and track your progress if you haven't continued to do so.
But the bottom line is if your building is below a 69, it's a no-go for LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems..
I hope this helps.
My project building is one of 40+ on a company's campus/site. They do not purchase electricity on a building-by-building basis, but for the entire site. My project building is metered and the information from that meter is what's been entered into Portfolio Manager. I can produce 3 months of electric energy bills for the site (along with 3 months of fuel oil bills, again for the site, which provides the district steam to the project building). I can determine the cost of my buldings electric usage using the building's meter and the charges to the site if this will be appropriate, as well as make a similar estimate of the fuel oil component based on steam usage. Is this a case where I will need to document/explain a special circumstance?
I'm not sure I completely understand your question. There might be two issues here:
1) that you do not have a full 12 months of metered energy data for your building for all energy types (a requirements / compliance issue), or
2) that your energy bills do not separate out the usage of your building (a documentation issue)
#2 is much easier to fix than #1. Is #2 the only issue here?
Thank you Mike. The issue is #2, the energy bills are not separated out for my building.
Please, could someone answer what to do for issue #2, when the energy bills reflect an entire campus rather than the single building we are trying to certify? Thanks.
As long as the project building has a separate meter for all energy sources, it doesn't matter necessarily if the bills are for the campus. In this case, I've seen project teams in the past submit the monthly readings from the building's meters, along with an explanation of how the data is read, verify calibration of those meters as is always required, etc, and explain why the values on the bills are different from the values used in Energy Star.
We are trying to classify a winery. One of the areas is used for barrel fermentation, and is temperature controlled anywhere from 55-75 degrees based on the fermentation process. Would this count as un-refrigerated warehouse space? We believe that it should be Other based on the fact that it is production space and has a higher energy usage than a typical un-refrigerated warehouse.
Second, we have a large space full of tanks for different fermentation processes. These spaces are unconditioned as each tank has its own insulation and temperature control system. We do not believe that this should count as unconditioned space because that does not reflect its actual energy use in any way. Would this fall under Other, general warehouse, unconditioned space?
You may want to reach out to Energy Star directly since it's important to get the space classifications right, but to me the fermentation room sounds like it would be more energy intensive than a warehouse space. Sounds like "Other" to me, but again I'd suggest verifying with Energy Star.
In my project there is an absorption chiller supplied by district heating. The building itself is also heated by district heating. The two district heat quantities (one for heating, one for cooling) are metered separatly.
Would it be right to enter the two meter to Portfolio Manager? If both account for heating, that wouldn't make sense. has anyone of you a solution?
The energy usage should be based on whatever is coming from outside the property, so if there are two separate steam meters then both would be included, even if some of the steam is used for cooling equipmentThe equipment used for cooling room air in a building for human comfort. rather than heating.
If one of these was a 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. to the other, then only the main utility level meter would be included.
From your description of separate meters, both would be included in Portfolio Manager.
My building is located on a university campus and contains just 2 classrooms and 3 lecture halls (~15.5 ksf). It's a relatively new building constructed in 2007.
Based on Energy Star's definitions of space types (http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=eligibility.bus_portfoliomanager_s...), I am unable to receive an Energy Star rating for my building. I entered in energy consumption data on Portfolio Manager and was able to classify it as "Other - College/University (campus-level)." This compared my building's source EUI score of 177 to the national average of 280.
First of all, I am not sure what "campus-level" refers to.
Second of all, when I begin to use the Case 2 calculator, "College/University" is not an option. The only similar options presented are "Education - K-12 school" and "Education - general." When I choose "general," the national average source EUI is 115 which is MUCH lower than "college/university"s national average souce EUI of 280 found on Portfolio Manager. Then when I run it as "K-12," the source EUI is 169 which is also much lower than "college/university" and is also lower than my building's EUI.
So when I use the Case 2 calculator, it does not meet the minimum requirement when I believe it should based off of Portfolio Manager. What should I do?
Within the "Other" category in Energy Star, there are actually two options for the subclassification: "Education" and "College/University - Campus Level".
I can't find the official definition for the "Campus Level" designation, but my understanding is that is the average EUI for all buildings across a campus (labs, dorms, classrooms, gyms, offices, etc), and that it would not be acceptable to try to apply that value to a single, specific building.
The definition for the general "education" classification in Energy Star does seem as though it would fit your situation (from http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html#Education):
"Buildings used for academic or technical classroom instruction, such as elementary, middle, or high schools, and classroom buildings on college or university campuses. Buildings on education campuses for which the main use is not classroom are included in the category relating to their use. For example, administration buildings are part of "Office," dormitories are "LodgingLodging are facilities that provide overnight accommodations to customers or guests, including hotels, motels, inns and resorts.," and libraries are "Public Assembly."
The source EUI for this space type in Energy Star is close to the "Education - General" option within the Case 2 Calculator.
So, it seems like maybe you'll need to take a look at energy efficiency opportunities in your building to get the EUI down.
A central chiller plant supplies chilled water to our project building and several other buildings. In order to generate the Energy Star report, we are required to input the chilled water energy consumption in 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..
With reference to the following equation, instead of having the Btu meter directly, would having both a temperature sensor and a flow meter installed on the chilled water suffice?
500 x Flow Rate [gal/min] x Delta T [F] = [Btu/h]
In principle that would be fine - LEED does not care how your metering is set up, just that you're measuring (and recording) the energy flowing into your building.
My one suggestion is to ensure that the quality of the metering and data logging is good enough. If you're measuring supply & return temperatures and water flows separately, just make sure you're doing it properly and robustly so you'll get accuracy and precision similar to what a dedicated, unified 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. meter would provide.
We have an 180,000 sf dormitory and trying to get an ENERGY STAR rating through Portfolio Manager. We have run into some issues with our facility because the dorm consists of 4 dormitory housing buildings (over 40,000sf) and 2 small office and study buildings under 5,000sf. They are all under the same management, same meter and operate as one facility.
In order to get an ENERGY STAR rating, we have to separately rate each building. Because the 2 small office and study buildings are under 5,000sf, we can't get a rating for them.
Is there a way to get a rating for the whole dormitory facility or will LEED allow us to exclude the two small spaces because they are under 5,000 sqft?
This issue can get real tricky real quick, so I'm not surprised it's come up. Before we get too far into the weeds here's a general rule of thumb: if you can find a solution using existing, published guidance then you should try that, as it will minimize your risk of delaying the LEED review.
This rule may sound obvious, but what makes it complicated for your topic is that several pieces of guidance out there might offer ideas or pieces of a solution but they're in different places:
1) ENERGY STAR's rules about how to treat multiple buildings
2) USGBC's rules on multiple buildings, as described here:
3) USGBC's rules related to the MPRs, which define which projects are a good fit for LEED itself:
So I'd suggest skimming each of these resources and seeing if any pre-approved solution jumps out at you. If it doesn't, then check in here again and we can take a deeper dive.
I am working on achieving LEED for a convention centre in Canada. Since the facility type falls under "Other - Entertainment/Culture", we are required to use Option C3 (Energy Baseline Including Historical Data plus Comparable Buildings).
My first question revolves around the comparable data I am using. All of the energy consumption data is from 2008 (the most recent year we could consistently acquire from other convention centres across Canada). Is it okay to use this information from over two years ago, or does it need to be more recent?
My second question has to do with the calculator itself. The macro in the program does not seem to be working properly as the information I am inputting in Table 8 is not transferring to Table 9. A red note on Table 9 states that there is "Data Missing from Table 8". To the best of my knowledge, I have input all of the relevant information. Is there any chance the file from CaGBC is not working correctly? If anybody can shed any light on this for me, it would be greatly appreciated!
The historical energy use data of the project building can include three years of consecutive data within the previous six years of the start of the performance period. Energy use data from three comparable buildings must inculde two consecutive years.
To normalize your building's historical data with comparable buildings I would use similar years for both. For example, use 2006, 2007 & 2008 energy data from your building + 2007 & 2008 from three comparable buildings to create a baseline.
Also, LEED Online only asks for one year of energy use data from comparable buildings even though the LEED reference guide asks project teams to gather 2 years of data.
Don't know what's going on with the online calculator.
Thanks for your response David. I should have clarified that we are doing the CaGBC version of LEED EB:O&M, so we don't have an online calculator, we have an offline excel calculator that's pretty buggy and causing some headaches. We'll continue to wait for CaGBC's answer on that though.
Which path is to be followed for an office building outside the US? Is this considered to be eligible for an Energy Star rating? If not, what are the choices of setting a benchmark?
Thanks for any replies,
Omer, office buildings outside the U.S. can (and should) use Energy Star Portfolio Manager to benchmark their performance.
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.