Category Archives: EPA

Existing Building Energy Consumption: Current Situations, Trends, Legislature and Solutions (Series Post #7: PlaNYC Local Law 84 and 87)

Energy use in NYC buildings contributes to 74% of citywide GHG emissions through the use of heating fuel, natural gas, electricity and steam. Energy expenses are up to $15 billion per year; therefore, NYC needed to act. NYC responded to this problem with the development of PlaNYC. In particular I’d like to focus on Local Law 84: Benchmarking (LL84) and Local Law 87: Energy Audits & Retro-commissioning (LL87).

“Released in 2007, PlaNYC was an unprecedented effort undertaken by Mayor Bloomberg to prepare the city for one million more residents, strengthen our economy, combat climate change, and enhance the quality of life for all New Yorkers. The Plan brought together over 25 City agencies to work toward the vision of a greener, greater New York. Since then, we have made significant progress towards our long-term goals.”

LL84 began in 2009 and requires owners of large buildings to annually measure and report their energy consumption through the previously mentioned benchmarking practice. In July, they upgraded the online energy star reporting tool (www.energystar.gov/portfoliomanager). They also recently released their second year benchmarking scores (read the report here: http://www.nyc.gov/html/gbee/html/plan/ll84_scores.shtml).

The first energy efficiency reports for LL87 are due at the end of this year. Due dates are based on a building’s tax block id #. Those ending in 3 are required to comply in 2013, those ending in 4 are required to comply in 2014 and so on and so forth. LL87 requires that all buildings 50,000 sf or larger undergo not only an energy audit but also retro-commissioning.
LL87 requires the following base building energy systems to be investigated:
•    Heating, ventilation and air conditioning
•    Electrical and light
•    Domestic hot water
•    Building envelope
•    Conveying systems

The approved certified engineers that can help one comply with LL87 include:
•    Certified Commissioning Professional (CCP)
•    Certified Building Commissioning Professional (CBCP)
•    Commissioning Process Management Professional (CPMP)
•    Accredited Commissioning Process Authority Professional (ACPAP)

Horizon Engineering Associates, LLP (HEA) has conducted nearly 70 energy audits and retro-commissioning projects for LL87 compliance. The facilities have ranged from museums to hospitals. Just to put into perspective how effective energy audits and retro-commissioning has been, when we surveyed 9 buildings, HEA was able to identify over 70 energy conservation measures that, when implemented, will save over $3.36 million in energy costs annually.

Has your building complied with LL84 and LL87? Are you aware of early compliance? Is your city implementing similar laws to NYC’s PlaNYC? Share your experiences in the comments below!

My next post will highlight an energy audit and retro-commissioning case study and comment on my experience with retro-commissioning.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Building efficiency, commissioning, Energy, energy audit, energy consumption, energy efficiency, energy usage, EPA, GHG

Existing Building Energy Consumption: Current Situations, Trends, Legislature and Solutions (Series Post #3: Benchmarking)

In my last blog, I provided an overview of the energy audit process. I highlighted the importance of energy audits and want to further this discussion by exploring the topic of benchmarking. Due to rising energy cost and the negative impact of burning fossil fuels, legislators have been demanding, in addition to energy audits, benchmarking. The benchmarking process creates a baseline of comparison for buildings in order to accurately set energy performance/sustainability goals that are specific to your facility, such as reducing overall energy or water usage.

What is Benchmarking?
Benchmarking your building’s performance will show you how the energy performance of your building compares to other, similar buildings. This process involves tracking a building’s energy and water usage and applying a standard metric to compare the building’s performance against past performance and to buildings of similar stature. This information allows us to identify the energy intensive buildings, set energy and cost saving priorities and monitor progress.

Benchmarking in Legislation.
With cities growing at alarming rates, energy demands are skyrocketing. NYC has stepped up to the challenge and is a proven frontrunner for energy legislation, including benchmarking. New York City’s largest buildings, just 2% of roughly 1 million buildings, account for 45% of the energy expended. Building a better, greener, greater New York City starts with Local Law 84 (LL84); which was signed into action in 2009 by Mayor Bloomberg. This law mandates annual energy and water benchmark reports for privately owned buildings over 50,000 square feet. Since the enactment of LL84, California and Washington State have instituted statewide requirements for benchmarking in cities such as: Austin; Philadelphia; Washington, D.C.; Minneapolis and Boston. Cities across the United States are jumping on the benchmarking movement every day in a fight to reduce buildings’ energy consumption.

Problems with Benchmarking.
Building owners and operators often do not have access to basic information on how their building performs. If building owners and operators obtain this information, it can be difficult to interpret it accurately. Misinterpreting the numbers can be very misleading. Another difficulty is comparing your building to other “similar” buildings. Do you compare your building against one of similar size, but the building use is different? Factors such as facility size and occupancy information, vacancy data and number of computers used can all manipulate data. How can one make an accurate comparison?

Suggestions.
The key to accurate benchmarking is the activities of the end users. Another key factor is communication. Facilities operators and owners must clearly articulate the goals of benchmarking their building, so that intentions are understood from the start. There are several motivations behind benchmarking, the main reasons given by facilities professionals for benchmarking according to the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study in 2007 are as follows: a) to identify energy-efficiency opportunities, b) to prioritize investments, and c) to make comparisons to other facilities.

Data presentation should explain findings clearly; what you were investigating and what you found. Once you have your benchmarking data, it will help to identify why and where a building is losing energy and where and how you can save energy. A tool that can help includes the newly upgraded EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manager Benchmarking Tool. Read about it here.

What Type of Energy Audit Will Produce Accurate Benchmarking Data?
In my next blog post, I will discuss the building technology society founded in 1894 known as the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). This professional association focuses on building systems, energy efficiency, indoor air quality, refrigeration and sustainability within the industry. I will explore what ASHRAE’s standards and guidelines are for energy auditing in my next post.

Do you have any questions regarding benchmarking? Leave me a comment and I’ll be sure to address them.

3 Comments

Filed under Building efficiency, Energy, energy audit, energy consumption, energy efficiency, energy monitoring, energy usage, EPA

Congress Clashes with the EPA for Greater Good?

One of the first initiatives that the newly-elected Republican House Majority is working on is to dismantle what they deem as the “job-killing” Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulations set forth by the current Executive branch (E.P.A. Faces First Volley From the House). Fred Upton, the new Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee is looking to slash the EPA budget, causing them to be incapable of enforcing some of the emission standards on greenhouse gases (GHG). His reason? He believes that jobs are being exported to other countries. According to the article, “[Mr. Upton] will use every resource available to protect American workers and our economy by rolling back the job-killing GHG regulations.” Once again, our elected government officials would rather sacrifice the well-being of our society, and future societies, in the name of the almighty dollar. But, the question becomes, “Are we looking at the big picture?”

It is true that the cost to generate a coal-fired plant may not be cost effective if in fact, current and more stringent GHG restrictions are passed. And, it is true that increasing restrictions on GHG emissions will cause coal plants to start to upgrade some of their emission controls causing extra costs, which (at some point) could wipe out coal-producing generator plants completely. However, to get to that point, we would need to have an infrastructure in place that could support new types of energy production and a smart energy grid to handle these new green power technologies. I can also say that the jobs that will be created to support all these measures will come from the USA – they just may not be found in Mr. Upton’s district.

I will admit that the current presidential administration has affected me personally in the areas of increased taxes and health insurance, which I am not happy about. What would make me even more unhappy would be to see the good things that this administration has done (such as making tighter restrictions on what we put in the air) being attacked for no good reason. It just doesn’t make any sense.

The jobs will not go overseas. What will happen is that the types of jobs will shift to more innovative technologies in this country, such as electric cars and solar panels. Jobs will also be created when coal plants choose to retrofit their facilities to provide reduced GHG, which will create tax revenue. It will be years before the effects of the EPA will affect the coal miners jobs. By that time, our economy will have recovered and jobs can be made available domestically, as well as abroad.

Let’s put our efforts on being a smarter country and being more energy efficient. Our focus should be on moving forward instead of savings jobs, just for the sake of saving jobs.

Leave a comment

Filed under carbon, Energy, energy usage, EPA, GHG, greenhouse emissions, renewable energy, Uncategorized