DOE Standard 90.1–2010 Said to Provide 18% Energy Savings for Commerical Buildings vs. 2007 Standard

DOE has determined that the quantitative analysis of the energy consumption of buildings built to Standard 90.1–2010,as compared with buildings built to Standard 90.1–2007, indicates national source energy savings of approximately 18.2 percent of commercial building energy consumption. Additionally, DOE has determined site energy savings are estimated to be approximately 18.5 percent.

States are required to certify that they have reviewed the provisions of their commercial building code regarding energy efficiency, and as necessary, updated their code to meet or exceed Standard 90.1–2010.

Certification statements by the States must be provided by October 18, 2013.


DOE Energy Standard

DOE lists the States that have filed certifications and those that have or have not adopted new codes on the DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy Web site at Once a
State has adopted a new commercial code, DOE typically provides software,
training, and support for the new code as long as the new code is based on the national model codes (in this case, ASHRAE Standard 90.1).
Some States develop their own codes that are only loosely related to the
national model codes and DOE does not typically provide technical support for those codes. However, DOE does provide grants to these States through
grant programs administered by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). DOE does not prescribe how each State adopts and enforces its energy codes.

(1) Large amounts of fuel and energy are consumed unnecessarily each year
in heating, cooling, ventilating, and providing domestic hot water for newly
constructed residential and commercial buildings because such buildings lack adequate energy conservation features;
(2) Federal voluntary performance standards for newly constructed buildings can prevent such waste of energy, which the Nation can no longer
afford in view of its current and anticipated energy shortage;
(3) the failure to provide adequate energy conservation measures in newly
constructed buildings increases longterm operating costs that may affect
adversely the repayment of, and security for, loans made, insured, or guaranteed by Federal agencies or made by federally insured or regulated
instrumentalities; and

(4) State and local building codes or similar controls can provide an existing
means by which to assure, in coordination with other building
requirements and with a minimum of Federal interference in State and local
transactions, that newly constructed buildings contain adequate energy
conservation features. (42 U.S.C. 6831)


via – Premier software for efficient project delivery – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, IDIQ, MACC, POCA, BOA – Cost Estimating and Project Management.

Michael Erbesfeld, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Forrestal Building,
Mail Station EE–2J, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–
0121, (202) 287–1874, e-mail:

Buildings and Energy Benchmarking

Source: Consulting/Specifying Engineer

One of the most widely used energy benchmarking systems in the United States is Energy Star Portfolio Manager, a free Web-based tool maintained by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Users input basic building parameters, such as space type, square footage, hours of operation, number of occupants, and number of personal computers (PCs), as well as 12 months of total energy data. This information is normalized to weather conditions and run through an algorithm that compares the input building to one with similar operating characteristics from the CBECS database. The program calculates a rating of 1 to 100 based on the building source EUI; source energy accounts for both the raw fuels and the energy products from the raw fuels consumed. This score represents the percentile performance above other comparable buildings. For example, a score of 67 means the building is performing better than 67% of all similar buildings nationwide. A rating of 50 is average, and 75 earns the building an Energy Star certification label for that year. This system compares all buildings on one scale and allows for tracking throughout the lifetime of the facility.

Energy Star Benchmarking Buildings

Placing buildings in an easily understood comparative metric puts this EUI statistic in perspective. Understanding the implications of the score and aligning this with the building marketing strategies will drive the basis for developing a target score. Is the goal to reduce spending by decreasing annual operating costs by 10%? Is the objective to increase leased tenant space by achieving Energy Star or another green certification? Are you aiming to gain a competitive edge over similar commercial buildings in your region? Benchmarking a facility or achieving a high rating may not only provide avenues for cost savings and certifications opportunities, but may be a necessity to comply with city or state legislation.

Policies that mandate the use of a benchmarking tool to rate and disclose the score for commercial facilities are currently being written and implemented throughout the world. New York City’s Local Law 84 in the Greener Greater Building Plan is an excellent example. A study by New York City revealed that buildings are responsible for 75% of the city’s total annual carbon emissions. Of these buildings, 85% are expected to still exist in 2030. This information, coupled with expensive retail energy prices, drove the effort for an energy efficiency policy. The law mandates annual energy and water benchmark reports for city buildings that are more than 10,000 sq ft, as well as for privately owned buildings that are more than 50,000 sq ft. It requires the use of Energy Star Portfolio Manager and the disclosure of the score.

Several other U.S. cities, including San Francisco, Seattle, Austin, and Washington, D.C., have already adopted similar legislation (see Figure 3). Of these, New York and San Francisco are coupled with a plan of action to reduce energy consumption for commercial buildings. Methods such as ASHRAE Energy Audits or retrocommissioning are included as mandatory efforts on a timed cycle.

Building Energy Ratings

The policies in place do not require achieving a specific score; however, some legislation mandates audits for buildings with low ratings, such as Washington’s Efficiency First bill, law SB 5854. For public buildings greater than 10,000 sq ft with an Energy Star score less than 50, a preliminary Energy Audit is required.

All of the current legislation relies on Energy Star. Due to the release of information explaining no results of the 2007 CBECS survey will be published and no 2011 survey will be administered, Energy Star will be based on 2003 data for the foreseeable future. This leaves cities in a possible conundrum if funding isn’t restored. However, there are alternatives on the horizon. The National Institute of Building Sciences is establishing a High-Performance Building Data Collection Initiative to determine a methodology for collecting and disseminating energy and building attribute data. Also, on Feb. 10, 2011, ASTM E2797-11 Standard Practice for Building Energy Performance Assessment for a Building Involved in a Real Estate Transaction was released. The standard aims to standardize collection, compilation, and analysis of building energy use and cost data.

Internationally, countries such as Australia, Russia, and Singapore have implemented policies to help regulate benchmarking and energy efficiency transparency. In the European Union (EU), the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) mandates that an energy performance certificate is provided to the owner or by the owner to the prospective buyer or tenant when buildings are constructed, sold, or rented out. Countries within the EU can develop their own systems for benchmarking buildings for the energy certificate. In Italy, for example, the buildings are given a score from A+ to G based on their EUI. EPBD has raised the awareness and importance of energy efficiency but has been a challenge for many of the member states to implement. In May 2010, EPBD was recast in hopes to simplify the language and process, increase the scope, strengthen quality control of the certificates, and promote low/zero-carbon buildings. As in all institutions, each benchmarking procedure or tool is different and has various nuances.

Energy Star Portfolio Manager is among the most popular benchmarking tools and is cited most often in U.S. legislation, and therefore this article will take the time to explore the specifics of benchmarking using this method. Even though the lack of updated CBECS data could halt future revisions of Portfolio Manager, current legislation mandates its use. Following is a review of frequently asked benchmarking questions that can help building owners avoid incorrect data entry or user confusion.

Your facility is not compared to other buildings that are using Energy Star Portfolio Manager as a basis for their ratings. The Energy Star score is based on an algorithm that compares your facility inputs to other buildings in the CBECS database that have similar regional location and operating characteristics. CBECS is a national sample survey conducted every four years to collect data on commercial buildings in the U.S., namely their energy-related characteristics and energy consumption. The last survey was completed in 2007, but data will not be released due to invalid results and the 2011 survey will not be conducted because funding has been cut. Therefore, Energy Star is currently using CBECS data from 2003 and will be for the foreseeable future. If funding is restored, as buildings increase in energy efficiency, however, it would be expected that the database of facilities would increase in energy efficiency and create a stricter benchmark comparison. An Energy Star rating is only valid for the 12 months of energy data being analyzed; therefore, facility owners are encouraged to maintain, track, and update the parameters and energy data.

One of the common factors that contribute to incorrect ratings is a misunderstanding of the definition of “weekly operating hours.” Energy Star defines it as the “number of hours per week that a building (or space within a building) is occupied by at least 75% of the tenant employees, and is therefore considered to be operational.” This does not include HVAC warm-up or cool-down hours or the time that 10% of the occupants remain after typical hours. This also means that the weekly operating hours should be set to zero for vacant spaces, because no occupants are present even though the space may be supplied with conditioned air.

Energy Star has several classifying space types such as office, bank, school, retail, hotel, data center, and so on. The EPA has recently further defined data centers, characterizing them as “spaces specifically designed and equipped to meet the needs of high density computing equipment such as server racks, used for data storage and processing… When a data center is located within a larger building, it will usually have its own power and cooling systems. The data center space is intended for sophisticated computing and server functions; it should not be used to represent a server closet or computer training area.” For spaces that do not qualify as data centers but are still considered server rooms that run 24/7 and have separate cooling, the space should be entered as “office space” with 168 operating hours per week, zero number of occupants, and the number of PCs equal to the number of servers. This is one exception to the weekly operating hours rule described above. For spaces that are more similar to IT closets or server rooms that lack separate cooling systems, the space is considered a supporting function and the square footage should be aggregated with the total office space.

Energy Star recently provided a module for more detailed data center inputs. Several commercial facilities with high-density computing areas encountered difficulties in accurately representing their facility. The changes allow the user to input IT energy metering configuration as well as the energy consumption for the IT energy, defined as “the total amount of energy required by server racks, storage silos, and other IT equipment in the data center.” This designation does not include HVAC equipment needed to cool the space or lighting needed to illuminate the space. Energy Star requires the output of any UPS to be submetered. Most UPSs connected to IT equipment have the capability to provide peak kilowatt consumption but do not have the immediate capability to provide kilowatt-hour consumption data. The UPS will need to be retrofitted or a submeter will need to be installed to capture the kilowatt-hour consumption for just the IT equipment. The EPA will make the IT energy a mandatory requirement for data center space types beginning June 15, 2012. Consequently, buildings must have their IT Energy submetered as early as June 15, 2011, for applications submitted in June 2012 (because 12 months of energy data is required).

Energy Star is meant to be a straightforward but accurate way to benchmark a facility. The easiest way to model a commercial facility in Portfolio Manager is to aggregate all of the tenants and supporting functions into one office-space-type input. If there are tenants that are generally present for 10 hours or more per week outside the typical occupied hours of the facility, those tenants should be separated out to better represent their occupied hours.

There are two ways this issue is currently being addressed: laws mandating tenants to disclose data, and utility programs reporting combined base building and tenant usage. An increasing number of utility providers are supplying their customers with aggregate monthly energy data without the individual tenant breakdown, therefore avoiding tenant disclosure issues and streamlining and simplifying the energy data collection and input. Commonwealth Edison (ComEd), a northern Illinois energy delivery company, developed a Web-based tool called Whole Building Energy Usage. This tool allows the user to first confirm the tenants and accounts present on-site, and then view one aggregate number each month for the base building and tenant usage combined.

One of the newest changes in Energy Star concerns the way the EPA is awarding the year in which you are labeled. Previously, a facility was awarded an Energy Star label based on the period ending date, or the last date of the 12 months of energy information under consideration. The application was good for 120 days from that period ending date. If a facility had 12 months of data from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 2010, and submitted an application in February 2011, the certification would be for 2010. Energy Star is now awarding certification labels based on the date the application is approved.

You’ve put your building on the map. You have a starting point. But where do you want to go and how do you plan to get there? The benchmarking analysis creates a fork in the road—meeting and surpassing the target versus falling short of the objectives. In either case, the facility owner or manager is, at a minimum, aware of how the building performs relative to similar buildings. If the facility already meets its target, that doesn’t mean there is no work to do. Energy Star ratings and other benchmarking scores are only valid for the 12 months being analyzed. With nationwide energy and disclosure policies, stricter energy standards and codes, numerous available green certification labels, and a competitive commercial market, a facility can quickly lag behind its rivals. To remain sustainable, the facility and owner must be environmentally friendly, economically profitable, and socially equitable.

A simple first step to maintaining a competitive edge is to regularly update a building’s benchmark and consciously monitor the usage trends and score. Performing this exercise once won’t get the results you are looking for. Continuously updating the benchmarking analysis is simple and inexpensive. It can save time and energy if action is taken when monitored values slide outside expected ranges.

The building energy performance field is evolving in response to market demands. If a building is rated as less efficient compared to its peers, it can negatively affect financial performance and competitive market presence, possibly raising red flags to lenders or other financers. In addition, there is a growing public concern for verification of energy savings and true performance. Local, state, and federal policies address some of this concern by mandating not only energy benchmarking, but also the public disclosure of the results. Not only are policies using benchmarking to drive energy reductions, but so are some green certification systems, which many building owners and managers use as a marketing tool. The U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) LEED Existing Building Operations and Maintenance Energy and Atmosphere Prerequisite 2 requires the use of Energy Star to benchmark the facility and achieve a score of at least 69 to qualify for a potential certification. Green Building Initiative’s (GBI) Green Globes and the Building Owner’s and Manager’s BOMA 360 program also use Energy Star to document points awarded for energy performance. It is unclear how the lack of future data will affect these rating systems; however, it is clear the benchmarking is a critical path and the driving force behind energy reduction, tracking, and performance disclosure.

As more owners properly benchmark their facility and begin to “place their buildings on the map,” establish a target, develop a roadmap, and monitor progress, we are collectively working toward reducing the environmental impact of buildings.

ISO Energy Management “Standard” – ISO 50001 – Major Gains? – Framework for Facility Energy Management ?

Energy management – Early ISO 50001 adopters report major gains – Source: Lambert, G., ISO, 2011

Evidence that publication of ISO 50001 was eagerly awaited is borne out by the number of organizations worldwide claiming to be the first in their country or sector to have adopted the new ISO International Standard on energy management. And what’s more, several are already reporting significant benefits and energy cost savings from their early ISO 50001 implementation.

It has been estimated that ISO 50001:2011, Energy management systems — requirements with guidance for use, could have a positive impact on some 60 % of the world’s energy use by providing public and private sector organizations with management strategies to increase energy efficiency, reduce costs and improve energy performance.

Early adopters, early gains

This ISO Focus+ online bonus articles summarizes reports from five early adopters to find out what all the excitement is about. The organizations are power and thermal management solutions enterprise Delta Electronics in China, global energy management specialist Schneider Electric of France, the Dahanu Thermal Power Station in India, LCD TV maker AU Optronics Corp of Taiwan, Province of China, and the Austrian municipality of Bad Eisenkappel.

They report numerous early gains from implementing ISO 50001, including significant reductions in power consumption, carbon emissions and energy costs, and benefits to manufacturing plants, communities and the environment.

Delta Electronics – China

Delta Electronics, a leading provider of power and thermal management solutions, has confirmed that its Dongguan factory in China has achieved ISO 50001 certification. The energy management standard is fundamental to the company’s five-year energy saving goal of reducing power consumption by 50 % in 2014, compared with 2009.

Delta Electronics’ ISO 50001-certified Dongguan factory in China produces electronic power components and adaptors.

With headquarters in Taiwan, the Delta Group also operates manufacturing plants in Brazil, China, Europe, India, Japan and Mexico. In addition to power and thermal management components, the company produces visual displays, industrial automation, networking products, and renewable energy solutions.

Daryl Liao, Executive Vice-President of Delta Group’s China region and Rock Huang, General Manager of the company’s ISO 50001-certified Dongguan factory.

Daryl Liao, Executive Vice-President of Delta Group’s China region. Comments: “The Delta Dongguan factory is delighted about passing the evaluation for the ISO 50001 energy management system. This recognizes Delta’s long-term dedication to eco-friendliness and energy saving. In the future, Delta Electronics will promote Dongguan’s successful factory experience to factories around the world as part of our corporate social responsibility.”

“Confident of 50 % reduction”

“With the implementation of the ISO 50001 energy management system in the Dongguan region, and production capacity at an even level from January to May of this year, we have already reduced power consumption by 10.51 million KWH as compared to the same period in 2010. This is equivalent to a reduction of 10.2 thousand tons of carbon emissions and a saving of CNY 8 million.

“Power consumption was also reduced by 37 % as compared to the 74.3 thousand KWH/million USD production value in 2009. We are confident that our goal of 50 % reduction in 2014 is just around the corner.” Rock Huang, General Manager of Delta’s Dongguan factory, added.

Schneider Electric – France

Global energy management specialist Schneider Electric has been awarded ISO 50001 certification for its Paris, France, head office, as part of the company’s commitment to continuously improving the energy management of its buildings, reducing their environmental footprint and enhancing user comfort.

At Schneider Electric’s ISO 50001-certified Paris head office, electric vehicles for business use by employees are charged via a photovoltaic roof above the charging station.

Known as the Hive (Hall of Innovation and Energy Showcase), the 35 000 m2 building accommodates more than 1 800 employees in Rueil-Malmaison, in the suburbs of Paris.

The company was initially certified to the EN 16001 energy management system standard and commenced adaptation and implementation of its system to ISO 50001 in November 2010, achieving certification in May 2011.

Gilles Simon, Environment Manager, Schneider Electric France.

Framework to “do the best”

ISO Focus+ asked Gilles Simon, Environment Manager for Schneider Electric France, to comment on how ISO 50001 implementation helps his company.

“The ISO 50001 standard provides a framework and a toolbox to ‘do the best’ with energy in a continual improvement cycle. Many of our facilities around the world are already involved in energy efficiency action plans. The standard helps a building, such as the Hive, to manage the widest field of energy efficiency in a more accurate way.

“That framework, already established by EN 16001 certification, leads us to define our energy management mission more precisely. It also helps us to involve our purchase teams in applying energy efficiency as a criteria in the selection of suppliers, forces us to clarify the benefit of each independent energy action in the building, and puts us into a continual improvement loop, checked every year by a third party.

The Hive, Schneider Electric’s energy efficient ISO 50001-certified head office near Paris, provides electric vehicles for business use by employees, charged via a photovoltaic roof above the charging station.

Easily adapted and integrated

ISO Focus+ asked Mr. Simon about the benefits of ISO 50001 to Schneider internationally, and as a leader in energy efficiency.

“It is an International Standard, so it can be implemented in all our facilities and our customers’ facilities around the world,” replied Mr. Simon. “Since it is very close to EN 16001, the energy management systems at our Paris and Grenoble locations were easily adaptable to ISO 50001. It can also be easily integrated with other ISO standards such as ISO 14001. About 90 % of our facilities worldwide are ISO 14001-certified.

“It also enforces our leader position in energy management. The certification, and its maintenance in years to come, demonstrates our involvement and our walk-the-talk policy. The standard will be promoted to our customers, as it is fully in line with our energy solutions including diagnosis, instrumentation and monitoring,” he added.

Dahanu Power Station – India

Dahanu Thermal Power Station in Maharashtra, India, operated by Reliance Infrastructure Limited, the country’s largest private sector power utility enterprise, was successfully certified in conformity with ISO 50001 in January 2011. The 2x 250 MW coal fired power station, located some 120 kms from Mumbai, has been in operation since 1996 and is described as Reliance’s landmark facility in terms of energy conservation. It is also certified to ISO 9001 and ISO 14001.

ISO 50001-certified Dahanu Thermal Power Station in Maharashtra, India, has a 275 meter stack, the highest in the country, to ensure better dispersion of particulate matter.

Remarkable achievements

Among early benefits from implementing the new energy management system standard, Rajendra Nandi, Head of Dahanu Thermal Power Station, cites what he calls a number of “remarkable achievements” including a complete review of the consumption of all major equipment, auxiliaries and buildings, improvement in the monitoring of total energy consumption, the establishment of energy use and consumption limits for the most significant energy uses, and the implementation of deviation control by operations and maintenance personnel.

In addition to these operational improvements, the plant has conducted a series of targeted investments since March 2010 which, aided by the organization’s new ISO 50001-based energy management system, are expected to yield annual savings of about INR 96.4 million from raised energy efficiency and management.

AU Optronics – Taiwan, Province of China

AU Optronics Corporation (AUO), described the second largest LCD TV panel maker in Taiwan, announced that its 8.5G TFT-LCD fabrication plant in the Central Taiwan Science Park has been successfully certified in conformity with ISO 50001. The company’s TV module plant in Suzhou, China, has also implemented the new energy management standard.

AUO’s ISO 50001-certified LCD TV panel fabrication plant in the Central Taiwan Science Park.

Shr-Kai Lin, AUO’s Vice-President of Global Manufacturing, comments:

Shr-Kai Lin, Vice-President of Global Manufacturing, AU Optronics Corporation, Taiwan.

“It is our great honour that AUO’s G8.5 fab plant in the Central Taiwan Science Park has obtained ISO 50001 certification. Energy management system certification has been gaining considerable attention from countries around the world. ISO 50001 will become the next global highlight following ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. Receiving the verification will become a prerequisite for a company’s international competitiveness.”

Saving energy, reducing emissions

ISO 50001 implementation is expected to help AUO achieve 10 % energy conservation at the plant this year, save an estimated 55 million kWh of electricity and reduce carbon emissions by 35 000 tons. The company now plans to adopt an ISO 50001-based energy management system at all its manufacturing plants.

Municipality of Bad Eisenkappel – Austria

ISO 50001-certified Bad Eisenkappel, Austria’s most southerly municipality.

Climate change, growing energy consumption in municipality buildings and plants, increasing energy prices, over-dependence on fossil fuels and unused regional energy sources were the drivers that compelled Bad Eisenkappel, Austria’s most southerly municipality, to implement ISO 50001.

Franz Josef Smrtnik, Mayor of the municipality of Bad Eisenkappel, Austria.

According to Franz Josef Smrtnik, Mayor of the 2 400 inhabitant community, adopting an energy management system was important because “continuous energy savings make budgets available for other important issues, and local energy resources create added value in the region.”

A structured approach

Ferdinand Bevc, Energy Manager of Bad Eisenkappel.

Ferdinand Bevc, Energy Manager of Bad Eisenkappel, explained: “We wanted to have a structured approach with long term effects, and did not want to focus on small individual projects only.” He became convinced of the value of ISO 50001 to a municipality following a presentation of the framework and advantages of the International Standard by Rainer Stifter, an international energy expert.

The implementation and certification process was also supported by the desire of the local council and all six political parties to eliminate fossil fuels, and achieve sustainable development.

Cost and energy savings

Although the ISO 50001 certification project only started in November 2010, early results “clearly show that the head official took the right decision to launch this initiative”.

During the first year, consumption of electrical energy is expected to decrease by nearly 25 % with the main savings achieved by updating the waste water plant and reducing energy consumption by 86 000 kWh, equivalent to EUR 16 000. Street lights will be converted to LED bulbs in combination with movement sensors and PV-modules, all of which are estimated to save a further 45 000 kWh. In addition, LED-bulbs have been installed in public buildings and local schools, aerators fitted to taps, and improvements made to municipal ventilation systems and the warm water supply.

Potential savings have also been identified during thermal imaging of buildings, and from the planned installation of thermal solar collectors.

From industry to municipality

“In Bad Eisenkappel it was possible to transfer the successful concept, already used by industry, to a rural municipality. Bad Eisenkappel is a real showcase,” said Rainer Stifter, although he emphasises that the achievement was only possible with the active support of all council employees, schoolmasters, and an energy-aware community.

Mayor Smrtnik concluded: “This project clearly shows the results that can be achieved by motivated employees. But much more important is the joie de vivre because of commonly achieved actions and a clean energy supply. A plant for pellet production as well as small hydro power plants will help to supply all buildings with renewable energy in the future. In addition, the first car charging station was opened recently.”

Latest ISO 50001 adopters

ISO 50001 adoption is gathering pace around the world. Among the most recent organizations to implement and certify to the new energy management standard are:

  • Dainippon Screen MFG. Co., Ltd. Rakusai Laboratory, Japan.
  • Porsche main plant and central spare parts warehouse, Stuttgart, Germany.
  • Samsung Electronics (Gumi), South Korea.
  • Sunhope Photoelectricity Co., Taiwan, Province of China.

Also, the Meeting, Incentive, Convention and Exhibition (MICE) Bureau, set up to promote Thailand as a green meeting hub in Asia, will encourage Thai MICE operators to seek ISO 50001 certification, by subsidizing 70 % of the THB 400 000 consultancy fee.

Impact Arena is the first MICE venue in Asia to achieve ISO 50001 certification, while two venues — The Bangkok International Trade and Exhibition Centre and The Queen Sirikit National Convention Centre — are in the process of obtaining certification.

The bureau will also encourage hotels, professional convention organizers and destination management companies to apply for ISO 50001 certification to strengthen their international competitiveness, and attract business from Europe and the United States.

*Garry Lambert is a freelance British journalist based in Switzerland



via – Premier cost estimating and project management software for efficient construction project delivery – renovation, repair, construction: JOC, IPD, SATOC, IDIQ, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA.

BIM – Energy Efficiency Tied to Real Estate / Real Property Sales – The Importance of High Performance Buildings vs. ROI

Due diligence relative to the energy efficiency of commercial is not only important relative to building resale and ROI, but is becoming mandated in several states, counties, and cities.   For example, use of the new ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) Standard E-2797-11, Standard Practice for Building Energy Performance Assessment for a Building Involved in a Real Estate Transaction, is required in several states and cities and under consideration in a growing number of others. Federal legislation is sure to follow.

Energy-efficient buildings cost less to operate, have higher net operating income (NOI), better asset value, and are more attractive to tenants.   Property owners and lessors can leverage higher performing buildings to attract and retain tenants that recognize that these buildings  have lower utility and operating costs.  In many cases leanders are provided a Pro Forma with a specific aline item for utilities/energy costs as a component of building operating costs.  Savvy buyers will also consider energy usage when comparing similar properties.

The Role of BIM, JOC, and IPD in Sustainability

Creating a baseline energy audit isalso  a “best practice” relative to enabling better short and longer term planning for facility renovation, repair, and maintenance projects.

It is likely that more and more facility condition assessments (FCAs) will include energy audits are a required, standardized component.

 In summary, standards and best practices relative to energy and condition audits are an important component of BIM ( Building Information Modeling ).  Robust practices for collection, assembly, evaluation, and reporting required information are key to BIM as are efficient renovation and repair contstruction methods such as JOC – Job Order Contracting, and IPD – Integrated Project Delivery.

Consistency and transparency in data collection, project evaluation, costing, and project managemetn are requirements in order to efficiently deliver quality  improvement project on time and on budget. 

via Premier Provider of Software for Cost Estimating and Efficient Project Management for JOC, IPD, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA ….

2007 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey – CBECS – Data Issues!


via – Premier efficient construction delivery method software provider – JOC, SABER, IPD, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA ….

Lack of Updated Commercial Building Energy Data Troubles Institute

May 03 2011
The National Institute of Building Sciences is alarmed that efforts to produce high-performance buildings may stall without up-to-date data following the news that the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) will not be releasing results of its 2007 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) due to statistical issues.
The Institute is also troubled because EIA is suspending work on its 2011 survey due to budget constraints, which means the last reliable data, from the 2003 survey, is nearly a decade old.

“The building industry relies on the availability of benchmark data and metrics from the CBECS to set goals and evaluate progress,” said Institute President Henry L. Green, Hon. AIA. “The nation is in the midst of a fundamental shift toward high-performance buildings. The significant gap of reliable data from the EIA is extremely troubling at a time when the building community is thirsting for quantifiable statistics to show their actions to save energy are working.”

Many efforts within the building community rely on the CBECS statistics, in particular the EnergyStar program. EnergyStar, which is overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy, uses CBECS data to establish its energy use benchmarks for buildings. Both the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) for Existing Buildings (LEED-EB) and the Green Building Initiative’s GreenGlobes tools reference EnergyStar as a baseline and some jurisdictions, such as Washington, D.C. and New York City, require disclosure of a building’s EnergyStar score. Because the EnergyStar program compares a building to its peers, the value of making comparisons will diminish as the underlying CBECS data becomes older.

In the wake of the troubling news from EIA, the Institute is establishing a High-Performance Building Data Collection Initiative to identify a path forward for collecting and disseminating data on all high-performance building attributes, not just energy use. This Initiative will allow the building community to still obtain the building energy data necessary to achieve national objectives for high-performance buildings.

VA’s / Veteran Administration’s Sustainability Initiative

The VA is doing some cool things in the BIM and Sustainability areas.  Below is a recent assessment initiative.

That said, the VA doesn’t have a standardized, efficient method to cost estimate and manage facility repair, renovation, sustainability, and minor new construction projects.  Most sites apparently rely upon the RSMeans Costworks product and ad hoc processes vs. a dedicated cost estimating and project management system.

The VA’s sustainability initiative would be well served to link dedicated tools to internal processes to improve accuracy, transparency, timelines, and scalability.

For example JOC / Job Order Contracting is being used, however, tools to support JOC would be a big win, especially if linked with BIM initiatives.  Costworks is not a cost estimating 0r project management system, but bascially RSMeans cost data in digital format.  Dedicated systems incorporate the various construction delivery methods and tools to dramatically increase collaboration among owners, contractors, and A/E’s, resulting in projects completed on-time and on-budget.

Veterans Administration Awards Contract to Green Building Initiative/Green Globes® for Online Evaluation Tool

WASHINGTON D.C. — The Green Building Initiative, (GBI), a nonprofit organization dedicated to the acceleration of sustainable building practices, was recently awarded a contract with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to provide online, green building self-evaluations for 173 hospital facilities using Green Globes® Continual Improvement of Existing Buildings environmental rating and assessment tool.  As part of the contract, GBI will provide training for VA facilities management personnel who will be performing the web-enabled assessments.  This recent award follows a 2009 pilot project by the VA in which 21 hospitals across the US were assessed and certified using the Green Globes system.

The Green Globes Continual Improvement for Existing Buildings (CIEB) tool was selected and GBI was awarded the contract based on VA requirements that included:  tool compatibility with a third party green building rating system developed by an ANSI – accredited organization,  compatibility with the Federal High Performance and Sustainable Building Guidance dated 12/1/2008, cost, and demonstrated experience with the assessment and certification of other Federal Government facilities.

The Green Globes CIEB program helps establish performance baselines, best practices and certification for operations and maintenance of a building in the environmental assessment areas of energy, water, resource management and emissions and pollution. The fully interactive, web-enabled tool also allows facility personnel to measure, document, and improve the sustainability of a building over time.

On February 28, 2006 the Department of Veterans Affairs joined 21 Federal departments and agencies in signing the Memorandum of Understanding on Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings.  The MOU commits the signatories to demonstrate leadership in implementing common strategies for planning, acquiring, siting, designing, building, operating, and maintaining high performance and sustainable buildings. The Sustaining Guiding Principles employ integrated design, optimizing energy performance, protecting and conserving water, enhancing the indoor environment, and reducing the impact of materials as best practices to achieve these goals.

“The 173 buildings to be assessed encompass some of the largest and most complex commercial buildings in the US. This project represents the first steps in what could be a broader sustainability assessment/certification initiative spanning entire campuses,” commented Ward Hubbell, President of the Green Building Initiative. “Green Globes is highly compatible with the elements of the High Performance and Sustainable Buildings Guidance and is an important tool to help federal agencies evaluate compliance with the Executive Order,” he added.

Upon implementation, this project represents the first large scale, nationwide deployment and application of online evaluation tools for comprehensive sustainability assessment within a major Federal Government agency.

ABOUT THE GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVE: The mission of the Green Building Initiative is to accelerate the adoption of building practices that result in energy-efficient, healthier and environmentally sustainable buildings by promoting credible and practical green building approaches.  A not-for-profit education initiative, the GBI is supported by a broad cross section of organizations and individuals with an interest in residential and commercial construction.  For more information on the Green Building Initiative, please visit





On Wednesday, July 21, 2010, the Government Management, Organization and Procurement Subcommittee held a hearing to examine to what extent the federal government has incorporated green, high-performance building practices into the renovation and construction of existing and new U.S. government owned and leased buildings in accordance with the Energy Independence and security Act of 2007 (EISA), and Executive Order 13514 and other relevant statutes and directives.

Kevin Kampschroer, Director of the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings (OFHPGB) at the United States General Services Administration (GSA).

A principal duty of the OFHPGB is to ensure full coordination of high-performance green building information and activities within GSA. Under the Recovery Act, GSA received $5.55 billion to be re-invested in the Federal buildings portfolio on an accelerated basis.  Among projects identified as appropriate for Recovery Act funding, GSA examined opportunities to improve the performance of projects already designed, with a focus on building systems, human performance, renewable energy generation and water conservation.  GSA prioritized buildings with the worst performance in energy and poor physical conditions, and the best plans for improvement. The following improvements were incorporated into all projects, where possible, based on funding and return on investment:

1. Building tune-up (re-commissioning, controls improvements, minor systems repairs and equipment replacement)

2. Lighting (day lighting control and occupancy sensors; control systems replacement and re-wiring)

3. HVAC retrofit/replacement

4. Renewable energy generation by photovoltaic, thermal solar or wind

5. Water conservation projects In addition, GSA has worked to establish geothermal and lighting technology acceleration programs.

Preliminary Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 data indicates that the Federal Government used approximately 386 trillion British thermal units (Btu)1 of energy in nearly 3.2 billion square feet of facility space.2 Federal facility energy use is a little over a third of the Federal
Government’s total consumption.3 The Federal Government consumed about 1.6 percent of the Nation’s total energy.4 Within this context the Department of Energy’s Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) and Building Technologies Program (BTP) work together with other Federal agencies—particularly the Department of Defense (DoD), the General Services
Administration (GSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—to help them adopt sustainable practices and technologies. I’m pleased to be here today to provide further information to this Subcommittee on these efforts. Constructing and operating Federal facilities in a sustainable manner has numerous welldocumented benefits, including:
• Saving taxpayer dollars through optimized life-cycle cost-effective actions;
• Enhancing employee productivity through the provision of safe, healthy and environmentally appealing workplaces;
• Reducing environmental impacts through decreased energy, water, and materials use; and
• Moving the overall market conditions toward higher performance, through the Federal demand for sustainable facilities.
Currently, Federal building sustainability performance is rated on Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Scorecards (Energy Management and Environmental) using six primary metrics, which link to requirements under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), and Executive Order (E.O.) 13423. The six current performance metrics are:
1. Reduced energy intensity;5
2. Consumption of electricity from renewable sources;6
3. The percentage of appropriate facilities which have been metered for electricity use;
4. Reduced water intensity;7
5. New construction compliance with Federal design standards to be 30 percent more energy efficient than applicable code; and
6. Application of sustainability guiding principles in Federal buildings.8
However, OMB Scorecards are expected to be updated this year, as OMB develops performance metrics that also reflect the new requirements of President Obama’s E.O. 13514 which includes ambitious new targets for agencies to meet in the areas of:
• Greenhouse gas emissions measurement and reduction;
• Pollution prevention and waste diversion;
• Regional and local integrated planning;
• Improving water efficiency and management; and
• Strategic Sustainability Performance Planning.
EPA occupies 11 million square feet (SF) of office, support and laboratory space across the country, which houses over 17,000 federal employees and 8,000 support personnel.
An area that is having a growing impact on our green building efforts is building operations and maintenance. Buildings designed to be energy efficient are frequently complex to operate and maintain. Locating and retaining qualified, competent and experienced building operators is becoming increasingly difficult, leading to inefficient and ineffective facility operations in certain locations. EPA is using EISA required energy assessments and re-commissioning to identify and correct poor preventative maintenance practices, improve mechanical system operating efficiency, and evaluate O and M contractor performance. EPA believes that EISA Sec 432 implementing guidance setting minimum training requirements for federal Energy Managers also should improve O and M at EPA and other federal facilities. EPA has also developed a Building Management Program to improve and standardize facility O&M best practices at all EPA-owned facilities.
Several tools that EPA developed include the Portfolio Manager and Target Finder, two on-line energy management tracking and assessment tools. Portfolio Manager is being used by 15 billion SF of commercial building market (20% of the market) to track energy and water usage, assess the performance of buildings, set goals and make reductions across building portfolios. Recently, as part of a joint effort between EPA, DOE and GSA, EPA expanded Portfolio Manager to include the Federal Sustainability Checklist, allowing federal agencies to track and report their progress on the sustainability goals required as part of Executive Order 13514. EPA’s ENERGY STAR Program is also providing training to federal agencies as part of this collaboration.
In recognition of the unique position of the Institute, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) called for the establishment of a High-Performance Building Council within the Institute tasked to look at the diversity of codes and standards for buildings and determine the needs necessary for implementation of high-performance buildings.
As its initial task, the Council identified the eight attributes that define a high-performance building. They are:  Sustainability Cost Effectiveness Accessibility Productivity Historic Preservation Aesthetics Functionality Safety and Security These attributes are reflected in the definitions of High-Performance Building and High-Performance Green Building as defined in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) which defines high performance as “the integration and optimization on a life cycle basis of all major high performance attributes, including energy conservation, environment, safety, security, durability, accessibility, cost-benefit, productivity, sustainability, functionality, and operational considerations.” As the Subcommittee will note, sustainability or “green” is just one aspect of a high-performance building. Federal agencies have numerous requirements related to these high-performance attributes beyond the energy, water and sustainability requirements in EPAct, EISA, and Executive Orders 13423 and 13514. Additionally, these requirements are likely to expand and change due to emerging issues impacting building occupancy and use including those tied to our aging population (e.g., addressing low vision) and to increased interest in technology and sustainability (e.g., flexibility for new technologies and new work environments). A sample of relevant laws and Executive Orders appear below: Americans with Disabilities Act National Historic Preservation Act Public Buildings Act National Environmental Policy Act E.O. 13006: Historic Properties E.O. 12977: Security Standards E.O. 12941/12699: Seismic Safety Presidential Memorandum on Disposing of Unneeded Federal Real-Estate (June 10, 2010).
As the High-Performance Building Council reported, common metrics are needed to measure and compare achievement of individual attributes and then to understand the interactions across attributes.
Ellen Larson Vaughan Policy Director Environmental and Energy Study Institute
EESI is a nonprofit policy-education organization dedicated to developing innovative solutions to climate change and other critical energy and environmental challenges and bringing sound science and technology information to policymakers through briefings, publications and other activities. Founded by members of a bi-partisan Congressional study conference, EESI has been an independent organization since 1984 1984 and is funded primarily through foundation grants and charitable contributions.
The federal government owns and operates nearly 500,000 facilities and can establish its own performance goals, above and beyond what Congress has already required. With about 3 billion square feet of floor space, federal buildings have a substantial environmental footprint, consuming 1.6 percent of the nation’s total energy use at an annual cost of $24.5 billion, according to the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP).
The terms high performance and green have evolved substantially over the years. We are grateful that your committee in Section 401 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 defined high performance green buildings for the purposes of the activities of the Department of Energy and General Services Administration in a way that captures best current thinking. These definitions challenge the government to design, construct, and operate its buildings at the state of the art and pave the way for these agencies to show leadership over the next two decades, a period during which we will need higher performance from federal and other buildings than ever before.
Retrofit is very important because new construction adds only a very small percentage to our national building inventory each year. Therefore, if we are to have a significant number of high performance green buildings in our lifetimes, much of the work will have to be retrofits of existing buildings.
Lynn G. Bellenger, P.E., FASHRAE President, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Standard 90.1 now serves as both the federal building standard, and the national reference for state adopted commercial building codes through the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA), the Energy Conservation and Production Act (ECPA), and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct).
The impact of our nation’s buildings is surprisingly large. Our nation’s buildings account for 40 percent of our primary energy use—more than either transportation or industry. Buildings are responsible for 72 percent of the electricity consumption and 39 percent of the total U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. The CO2 emissions from US buildings alone approximately equal the combined emissions of Japan, France, and the United Kingdom for transportation, industry, and buildings.
Building Modeling
My presidential theme is “Modeling a Sustainable World.” Building modeling represents one of the most powerful tools for optimizing building performance, and it is an area worthy of increased support from Congress. Today, we have the tools to create a virtual model to consider options in size, shape and appearance. But more than just a visual representation, our models can simulate energy performance, assess daylighting options and predict thermal comfort.
Integrated Building Design
To exploit the full capability of modeling tools, we must transform our design approach from a sequential process — where one discipline completes its work and hands off the design to the next — to a collaborative integrated building design process — where all of the disciplines involved in the building design and construction work as team from the beginning to evaluate options and optimize the design.
Our biggest challenge is implementing integrated design into daily practice. The traditional sequential approach misses the rich opportunities for optimizing building performance through a collaborative approach throughout the design process.
It is going to require a cultural shift in our industry to transform the design process, and it’s a shift that has to occur if we are going to reach our goal of net zero energy buildings.
To help expand awareness throughout the federal government of the potential benefits of increased energy savings that can be achieved through integrated, whole building design, we recommend creating a new demonstration program with selected, geographically diverse federal buildings. A report on the success and challenges of such a demonstration program would yield useful lessons learned that could be applied and expanded to other federal buildings, as well as buildings in the private sector.
Standard 189.1: A New Foundation for Green Building Standards Earlier this year, in our continuing efforts to push the envelope on building efficiency, and in collaboration with the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES) and the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), ASHRAE published Standard 189.1 – the first code-intended commercial green building standard in the United States. Standard 189.1 also serves as a compliance path of the International Green Construction Code (IGCC), published by the International Code Council. Standard 189.1 represents a revolutionary new step for building standards, as it provides a long-needed green building foundation for those who strive to design, build and operate green buildings. From site location to energy use to recycling, this standard will set the foundation for green buildings through its adoption into local codes. It covers key topic areas similar to green building rating systems, including site sustainability, water use efficiency, energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality and the building’s impact on the atmosphere, materials and resources.
The energy efficiency goal of Standard 189.1 is to provide significant energy reduction over in ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007. It offers a broader scope than Standard 90.1 is intended to provide minimum requirements for the siting, design and construction of high performance, green buildings. For this reason, ASHRAE recommends authorizing a pilot program with a select group of geographically diverse federal buildings to examine the effects
requiring all new federal buildings, by 2020, to meet the IGCC, and include ASHRAE Standard 189.1 as a compliance path of the IGCC. This will help the federal government meet the objectives of Executive Order 13514 of ensuring that beginning in 2020, all new federal buildings are designed to achieve zero-net-energy by 2030. A report on the success and challenges of such a demonstration program would also yield useful lessons learned that could
applied and expanded to other federal buildings, as well as buildings in the private sector.
James Bertrand President, Delphi Thermal Systems
Today, air conditioning use alone represents nearly 13% of all U.S. electricity consumption! On the residential air conditioning side, the consumption rate is already at 17% and will grow to 19% by 2030.
Furthermore, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is forecasting that consumers in the United States will increase their use of electricity by 1.4% annually through 2030. This data already accounts for the energy-efficiency legislation enacted that will impact future consumption. With energy consumption on the rise and the associated implications the increases will bring, it’s an issue both government and industry can not afford to ignore.
Brought to you via
The Leader in Construction Cost Estimating and Project Management software for the DOD and Federal Sector.
RSMeans Partner

Benchmarking – Collaborative for High Performance Schools Unveils Operations Report Card – ConstructionAdvisorToday

Collaborative for High Performance Schools Unveils Operations Report Card

The Collaborative for High Performance Schools (CHPS) recently introduced the Operations Report Card (ORC), an online tool that benchmarks current performance, analyzes existing conditions, and recommends environmentally preferable improvements for existing school buildings.

The new program allows both high- and low-performance schools to benchmark their current performance and receive suggestions for improvement in energy efficiency, thermal comfort, visual comfort, acoustics, and indoor air quality. ORC development was funded by a grant from the California Energy Commission. ORC combines facilities data, system and classroom measurements, and occupant surveys to generate report card scores and recommended improvements.

“The occupant survey was incredibly successful and provided us the opportunity to initiate open conversations with the classroom teachers, to listen to their concerns, and to further increase a trusting work relationship,” said Steven Plaxco, director of maintenance and facilities at Yuba City Unified School District, which spearheaded the district’s participation in the pilot school program.

The program had six pilot school participants over the last year, including one from the Los Angeles Unified School District.

“With the introduction of the Operations Report Card, CHPS is providing an affordable solution for improving the performance of the 130,000 existing schools in the United States,” CHPS Executive Director Bill Orr said.

The cost for schools to participate in the ORC program ranges from $500 to $900 per school, depending on the number of schools that a district enrolls. It costs $900 for an individual school to participate. Recognition will be available for two classes of participants: high performers and high improvers. The program formally recognizes schools that make noticeable gains toward high performance even if they start off lower on the spectrum.

via Collaborative for High Performance Schools Unveils Operations Report Card – ConstructionAdvisorToday.

Wisconsin deserves an “F” for Sustainability / Green?

“I am disappointed that the governor has chosen to veto SB 616, the High
Performance Green Building Bill.
This bill would have saved taxpayers money and made Wisconsin a leader in green building construction. The governor, and most importantly Wisconsin, has missed an opportunity to create and promote healthy,
resource-efficient public buildings in Wisconsin with full public disclosure of
building lifecycle costs,” Representative Moleske.
SB 616 required that new State buildings over 10,000 square feet be built to LEED – silver or equivalent performances design standards and also comply with certain energy star conservation goals and higher-efficiency building codes.
SB 616 also required local public buildings at the same square footage threshold to meet but not certify their building designs at the LEED silver or equivalent performance standard.
High performance green schools recently built in Merrill and Hudson Wisconsin were built 23% and 29% below the median price per square foot of similar buildings built nationally.
Building green saves money through minimal initial investments of 2% of
design costs with savings of 20% of the total construction costs and significant savings in operational costs over the life of the building.
This bill would have required the state to conduct an energy audit of all of its buildings.
Such information is not currently collected. “It’s a shame that we let taxpayer money be wasted by energy-inefficient state and public buildings. We owe it to the hardworking people of this state to use their tax money as efficiently as possible, and that includes taking responsibility for government energy costs,” stated Molepske.
“The Governor sided with state bureaucrats who did not show up or provide
amendments at three public hearings and three executive sessions on the bill, unlike numerous private groups, and waited until the bill could not be amended to voice their objections.
These same bureaucrats are the reason Wisconsin will not implement SB 616’s energy conservation changes so many Wisconsinites are seeking
for our tax-supported public buildings.”
Senator Fred Risser was a driving force in the Senate on this bill and so were the legislative members of the State Building Commission who recognized the importance and quality of this legislation. The bill was supported by 19 senators and 59 representatives, who represent well over half of the state’s population.
The government should set an example and lead the way in green, energy-efficient construction “This Legislation was about taking a step forward and the state leading by example. Unfortunately, the government decided it would rather regulate than be regulated,” stated Molepske.
“I welcome the Governor’s commitment to including the ‘goals’ of this legislation in the next capitol budget, and I challenge those that did not do their jobs to make amends with the people of Wisconsin by working in good-faith over the summer and next session with me and other supporters of this bill, to enact this needed energy conservation initiative,” concluded Molepske.
SB 616 and its goals had broad support among a variety of organizations including:
• the United States Green Building Association
• the Wisconsin Green Building Association
• the International Code Council
• the American Chemistry Council
• Miron Construction
• Clean Wisconsin
• Boldt Construction
• Great Lakes Timber Professionals Association,
• Sierra Club
• Wisconsin Education Association Council
• Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters
• RENEW Wisconsin
• Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewage District
• the Wisconsin State Council of Carpenters
• the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
• JohnsonDiversey
• Plum Creek Timber Company
• Milwaukee Millwork
• Leonardo Academy

Above is Representative Molepske’s statement on the veto of the High Performance Green Building Bill


High Performance Buildings Portal

You may find the NIST High Performance Buildings Portal  High Performance Buildings Portal of value.

There are some ambitious projects underway:

BFRL Program: Improved Building Energy Performance

BFRL Strategic Goal: Measurement Science for Net-Zero Energy, High-Performance Buildings

Building Environment Division

Indoor Air Quality Group


Numerous technologies are emerging to reduce energy consumption in buildings, but it is often difficult to determine the performance of buildings as they are constructed. This performance not only relates to energy consumption, but it also applies to the level of indoor environmental quality and economics of the energy measures.


The goal of the Improved Building Energy Performance program is to improve the as-constructed performance of high-performance buildings by developing and implementing the measurement science to assess the energy consumption, CO2 emissions, indoor air quality, and cost effectiveness of buildings. The program addresses building energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and indoor air quality measurement science in a holistic, integrated manner that considers system interactions involving weather, the building envelope, control systems, and space conditioning equipment. Research efforts are focused on the development of cost-effective building energy monitoring systems, improvements in the efficiency of space conditioning equipment through self diagnostics and enhanced design tools, providing accurate metrics to capture the performance of thermal insulation, improved measures of CO2 emissions from facilities, and development of tools to enhance indoor air quality (IAQ) through measurement science advancements to address volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions and advanced ventilation schemes. Metrics to assess the sustainability of buildings and to quantify the carbon footprint of buildings are an integral part of the program.

This program will transform U.S. innovation and competitiveness in the building sector by developing the means to assess next-generation building technologies needed to achieve net-zero energy buildings. Additional impacts of this program include significant reduction in the nation’s CO2 emissions and reduced stress on the electrical power grid. Previous impacts of this program have included methods of testing and rating procedures that are used exclusively throughout the appliance and solar thermal industries, leadership in the formation of the U.S. Green Building Council, and providing the technical foundation for energy and indoor air quality standards adopted by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE.)