Enabling Efficient Life-cycle Managment of the Built Environment supported by Digitial Technology – BIM – 2014

Technology is not the primary obstacle to efficient life-cycle management of the built environment!

  1. Technology limitations/issues – come from people
  2. Different meanings for the same parts
  3. Economic impacts – based on people
  4. Different values and attributes for same processes
  5. Social Impacts – outcomes for people
  6. Stakeholders (Owners!!!, AE’s, Contractors, Oversight Groups, Business Product  Manufacturers, Users) determine the uses of technology, economic value and environmental impacts

The roadblocks to increased collaboration, transparency, and productivity within the AECOO sector are as follows:

1. Lack of a robust, shared Ontology.

2. Refusal to adopt collaborative construction delivery methods such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) for new construction, Job Order Contracting (JOC) for repair, renovation, sustainability, and minor new construction projects.

3. Current focus upon first-costs vs. life-cycle costs.

Standardized terms, definitions, metrics and the deployment of “best practice” business process is not rocket science.  Unfortunately too many AECOO participants and stakeholders need build their level of awareness of the above vs. ad-hoc and antagonistic processes such as design-bid-build, or even design-build.  The latter is a good attempt to be IPD-like, but is not IPD.

 

Image

 

The development and  application of robust standardized terms, taxonomies, hierarchies, etc. will enable BLM/BIM.  We need to move faster to deal with critical global Economic and Environment realities (global warming, diminishing natural resources, new competitive landscape …).

 

  • Terms – language
  • Syntax – make deductions from language
  • Semantics – interpretation of languages
  • Taxonomy – classification system
  • Ontology – meaning-making system
  • World Theatre – social system

Image

“Outcome-based Pathway” – The New Mandate for Energy Compliance?

The following addition is being proposed to the International Green Construction Code (IgCC).

 

“The building community needs a better baseline of actual building performance against which to measure progress. More importantly, the application and use of prescriptive criteria must be eliminated in favor of stated performance goals or expected outcomes (although, after setting those goals or outcomes, prescriptive guidance to achieve them can be developed).”  – NIBS

 

SECTION 60X
OUTCOME‐BASED PATHWAY REQUIREMENTS
60X.1 Outcome‐based requirements. Compliance for buildings and their sites to be designed on an outcome
basis shall be determined by actual measurement of all the energy being used once the building and the
energy using elements associated with the building site are in full operation in accordance with Equation 6‐3.
Where a building has multiple occupancy types, the maximum allowable energy use shall be based on total
gross floor area of each occupancy type in relation to the total gross floor area of all occupancy types within
the building. All buildings and their sites utilizing these Outcome‐Based Pathway Requirements shall comply
with the International Energy Conservation Code. Compliance shall be determined based on a determination
of actual energy use in accordance with this section.
Exception: Buildings having one or more uses or occupancies not listed in Table 60X.1 or where a mixed use
building per the International Building Code includes any occupancies not shown in Table 60X.1, shall not be
eligible to demonstrate compliance with this code in accordance with Section 60X.
60X.1.1 zEPI. All outcome‐based designs shall demonstrate a zEPI of not more than 51 as determined in
accordance with Equation 6‐3.
zEPI = 100 (EUIa / EUIr) (Equation 6‐3)
Where:
EUIa = the Actual Annual Energy Use Index for the building and building site expressed
in accordance with Section 60X.1.2 and Equation 6‐4.
EUIr = the Reference Annual Energy Use Index for the building use and occupancy in
Table 60X.1 as adjusted by Section 60X.1.3 where applicable
TABLE 60X.1
REFERENCE ANNUAL ENERGY USE INDEX (EUIr)
Climate Zonea 1A 2A 2B 3A 3B 3B 3C 4A 4B 4C 5A 5B 6A 6B 7 8
Use and Occupancyb Reference EUIr skBtu/sf/yr
Business (B)
Office 154 159 154 151 124 140 137 167 144 152 179 155 190 176 208 282
Bank 154 159 154 151 124 140 137 167 144 152 179 155 190 176 208 282
Medical Office (non
diagnostic)
115 119 115 113 93 104 102 125 108 114 134 116 148 131 156 210
Storage (S‐2)
Distribution/Shipping
Center
105 67 69 66 52 64 55 75 70 66 87 81 104 95 119 186
Mercantile (M)
Grocery/Food Store 448 476 452 484 434 450 473 522 479 514 554 511 592 561 633 758
Assembly (A)
Library (A‐3) 234 232 224 230 193 217 209 254 228 235 275 246 304 277 327 434
Educational (E)
Elementary/middle
school
140 139 134 134 111 128 124 149 132 132 160 141 182 161 193 274
Institutional (I‐2)
Hospital/Inpatient
health
417 422 397 408 394 388 407 425 366 398 425 374 439 394 446 532
a. Climate zones as determined in accordance with by Section C301 of the International Energy Conservation Code.
b. Use and occupancy as determined by Chapter 3 of the International Building Code.
60X.1.2 Actual energy use intensity (EUIa). The actual energy use intensity (EUIa) of the building and
building site shall be expressed in accordance with this section of the code. On‐site renewable energy
generation in excess of the generation requirements of Section 610 may be included in the calculation of
the EUIa.
The EUIa shall be determined in accordance with Equation 6‐4 and Sections 60X.1.2.1.
EUIa = AEUconsumption – AEUrenewable
TCFA (Equation 6‐4)
Where:
EUIa = the energy use intensity of the building and building site
AEU consumption = the annual energy consumed by the building and building site from all forms of
energy defined in Sections 603.3.1 through 603.3.6 and converted to source Btus in accordance
with Sections 602.1.2.2 and 602.1.2.3.
AEU renewable = the annual energy produced by onsite renewable energy systems in excess of the
production required by Section 610 and converted to source Btus by multiplying onsite Btu
production by a factor of 1.
TCFA = the total conditioned floor area of the building as defined in Section C202 of the
International Energy Conservation Code.
60X.1.2.1 Measurement of AEUs. The AEUs shall be determined from metering, utility billing or
other form of measurement in accordance with Section 603.
60X.1.3 Reference energy use intensity (EUIr). The reference energy use intensity shall be determined
utilizing Table 60X.1. The EUIr value from Table 60X.1 shall be adjusted based on the monthly weighted
average percentage of occupied floor area during the 12‐month compliance period as documented in
accordance with 60X.3.2. For buildings with multiple use or occupancy designations in Table 60X.1, the
EUIr shall be adjusted based on the weighted area average of the use or occupancy.
60X.2 Annual direct and indirect CO2e emissions. The emissions associated with the EUIa shall be less than or
equal to the CO2e emissions associated with the CO2e emissions in accordance with the EUIr determined in
Section 60X.1.3. The CO2e emissions calculations for the building and building site shall be determined in
accordance with Sections 60X.2.1 and 60X.2.2 and Equation 6‐5.
CO2ea ≤ (CO2er x zEPI) / 100 (Equation 6‐5)
where:
zEPI = the minimum score as prescribed by Section 60X.1.1
CO2ea = emissions associated with the EUIa of the building as determined in accordance with Section
60X.1.2
CO2er = emissions associated with the EUIr as determined in accordance with Section 60X.1.3
60X.2.1 Onsite electricity. For the purpose of determining compliance with the provisions of Section
60X.2, the CO2e emissions associated with onsite electricity use shall be calculated in accordance with
Section 602.2.1.
60X.2.2 Onsite nonrenewable energy. For the purpose of determining compliance with the provisions of
Section 60X.2, the CO2e emissions associated with onsite non‐renewable energy use shall be calculated in
accordance with Section 602.2.2.
60X.3 Compliance
60X.3.1 Issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. Upon the satisfaction of the code official of
compliance with all code provision other than those covered in Section 60X, the official shall issue a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy as authorized in Section 111.3 of the International Building Code.
60X.3.2 Reporting of Energy Use and CO2e Emissions. Within 36 months of issuance of the temporary
certificate of occupancy, the building owner shall provide the AHJ with documentation, in a form
acceptable to the code official and certified by a registered design professional, of a continuous 12‐month
period where the building meets requirements of Sections 60X.1 and 60X.2. The occupancy or use type for
the occupied period utilized in Section 60X.1.3 shall be indicated in the documentation and include, at a
minimum, the time periods and square footage of the building occupied by all building tenants.
60X.3.3 Certificate of Occupancy. Upon compliance with Section 60X.3.2, the building shall be issued a
Certificate of Occupancy.
60X.3.4 Non‐Compliance. Should the building owner fail to comply with Section 60X.3.2, the owner shall
be deemed non‐compliant and be issued a violation.

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software solutions for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, MATOC, SATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, BOS … featuring an exclusively enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database, visual estimating/automatic quantity take off ( QTO),  and collaborative contract/project/document management, all in one application.   Our technology is currently serving over 85% of United States Air Force bases and rapidly growing numbers of other DOD and non-DOD (United States Army Corps of Engineers,  Army, GSA, Homeland Security, VA..) federal departments/agencies, as well as state/county/local governments, colleges/universities, healthcare,  and airports/transportation.  RSMeans Strategic Partner

 

Climate Change Adaptation for Built Infrastructure

Attend a presentation titled Climate Change Adaptation for Built Infrastructure.  During this presentation, Kim Magraw (US Department of Interior), Bridget Deemer (Washington State University), John Hall (US Department of Defense), and Ann Kosmal (General Services Administration) will provide the latest update on the preliminary results on research and information needs identified in the FY 2013 Agency Adaptation Plans.

The details for the meeting are as follows:

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

9:00 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

Room 109

Keck Center of the National Academies

500 Fifth Street NW

Washington, DC

If you are planning to attend in person, please register on-line at the following website to ensure that your name is on the security guard’s sign-in sheet.

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/EventRegistration/public/Register.aspx?event=9785CA5B

For those that will not attend in person, you can view the presentation via WebEx; please register on-line at the following website:

http://sgiz.mobi/s3/4fa1bf9badb3

Above is from the Federal Facilities Council and shared via 4Clicks.com – leading provider of cost estimating and efficient project delivery software and services for JOC – Job Order Contracting, SABER, IDIQ, MATOC, SATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, BOS and more.  Featuring an exclusively enhanced 400,000+ RSMeans unit price cost database and integrated contract, project, and document management, as well as visual estimating and electronic quantify takeoff (QTO).

Sustainability of DOD Buildings – Reuse of Existing Buildings

Reusing existing buildings achieves a 15%+ higher return on investment and 20% reduction in greenhouse gases.   It is less  costly and more sustainable to reuse existing buildings.

With 345,000 buildings, with over 105,000 buildings more than 50 years old, the importance of efficient renovation, repair, and sustainability of existing buildings is paramount.

DoD Building Treatment Terms
•“Adaptive reuse & rehabilitation” are terms of art outside DoD
•The DoD term for “major rehabilitation” is “modernization”
•Modernization means: “the alteration or replacement of facilities solely to implement new or higher standards to accommodate new functions or to replace a building component that typically lasts more than 50 years.”
•This study compares the costs and GHG of modernization with new construction

Sustainment/Status Quo
•Formulated for measuring baseline energy consumption
Demolition and New Construction
•LEED Silver certifiable construction – 2009 LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations
Full Modernization with Strict Application of Historic Preservation Standards (HPS)
•Full modernization with a strict application of Historic Preservation Standards ( HPS) and other DoD facility design standards
•LEED Silver
Full Modernization with Strict Application of AT/FP
•Full rehabilitation/modernization but with strict application of Anti-terrorism/ Force Protection requirements through building hardening, seismic and other DoD facility design standards
•LEED Silver

Applicable design standards include:

  • Whole Building Design
  • UFC 1-200-01 General Building Requirements
  • UFC 4-610-01 Administrative Facilities
  • UFC 1-900-01 Selection of Methods for the Reduction, Reuse and Recycling of Demolition Waste
  • UFC 3-310-04 Seismic Design for Buildings
  • DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Force Protection Standards for Buildings
  • Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings

Findings

  • DoD’s Pre-War masonry buildings are an underutilized resource for meeting DoD GHG carbon reduction goals
  • ATFP and Progressive Collapse requirements tend to be rigidly and prescriptively applied, raising construction costs and introducing additional Scope 3 GHG emissions
  • Prior modernization treatments result in loss of original energy saving design features in Pre-War Buildings
  • Differences in GHG in alternatives resulted from the amount of new building materials introduced and transportation of demolition debris
  • Cost estimates and construction bid requests should include materials quantities in addition to costs to evaluate and validate GHG impacts.
  • Design professionals with practical experience with archaic building materials and systems are critical to the development of accurate planning level specifications
  • GHG emission tradeoffs of proposed new materials and building options should be evaluated early in the conceptual design process

Recommendations

  • Incorporate life-cycle GHG emissions analysis into DoD MILCON and SRM programs
  • Invest in formulation of carbon calculator system
  • Place more emphasis on existing buildings as viable project alternatives to meet mission requirements
  • Identify characteristic strengths and vulnerabilities by class of building
    Place more emphasis on existing buildings to meet DoD energy reduction goals
  • Avoid modernization treatments that result in loss of original energy saving design features in Pre-War Buildings

Green House Gas - Benefits of Building Re-use vs. New Construction

Efficient project delivery methods are of critical importance to the task of sustainability and life-cycle management of the built environment.   Job Order Contracting ( JOC ), and SABER are proven project delivery methods for renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction.  JOC and SABER are a form of Integrated Project Delivery for existing buildings and infrastructure.

JOC and SABER provide the following advantages to building portfolio Owners:

•Fast and timely delivery of projects.
•Consolidation of procurement – lower overhead cost and procurement cost.
•Contractor and owner efficiencies in prosecution of the work.  Development of a partner relationship based on work performance.
•Virtual elimination of legal disputes, claims and mitigation of change orders.
•Standard pricing and specification utilizing a published unit price book (UPB), typcially RSMeans-based, resulting in efficient and effective estimating, design, and fixed price construction.
A bit more about JOC –
  1. “IPD Lite” for Existing Buildings.
  2. Consolidates procurement to shorten Project Timelines and reduce procurement costs.
  3. Transparency of pricing and procurement compliance through Unit Price Book.  Owner creates internal estimating (IGE)
  4. Long Term Facility Relationship increases productivity and enables reiterative process improvements.
  5. Quality and performance incentivized through IDIQ form of contract with minimal guarantee and clear maximum volume.

Traditional Project Delivery vs. Integrated Project Delivery

via.www.4Clicks.com – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software and services for JOC, SABER, SATOC, IDIQ, MATOC, MACC, POCA, and BOA.  Featurings:

  • Exclusive 400,000 line item enhancement of RSMeans Cost Data
  • Automated Technical Evaluations
  • Contract, Project, Estimating, Document Management
  • Visual Estimating

TCO - Green House Gas

Legal and Policy Framework
•National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 ( Amended)
•Energy Policy Act of 2005
•Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
•Executive Order 13423: Federal Environment, Energy, and Transportation Management (2007)
•Executive Order 13514: Federal Leadership in Environment, Energy, Economic Performance (2009)

Building Operations and Maintenance – Energy & Carbon Reduction

ENERGY & CARBON EMISSIONS OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
(Source: NYC Task Force)
The most immediate and promising route to reducing building fuel, electricity use and carbon emissions lies in more efficient operation of existing buildings.
Most buildings consume more energy than necessary, often substantially more. The range in performance is enormous:  The
least efficient existing buildings use three to five times more energy
than the most efficient buildings. Even among new buildings, marked
discrepancies exist between design expectations and actual energy use.
What’s more, existing buildings are here to stay: It’s estimated that 85
percent of the buildings that will constitute New York City’s real estate in 2030 are already standing today.
Much of the variation in energy use among buildings and between an individual building’s design and actual usage is due to differences in operations. This includes both decisions on when to replace aging capital equipment and day-to-day operating schedules and maintenance choices.
Mismatches between the requirements of efficient operation
and the resources made available are frequent. These occur because
buildings are large, complex entities that require constant control
and correction.
Building operations are often neglected, and maintenance is frequently deferred, steps that can lead to excessive energy use and high operations expenses.
The reasons are many. For one, building residents and management alike tend to judge a building’s performance by its level of comfort and reliability, rather than its energy efficiency. Also, energy and water costs are modest when compared with such expense as mortgages, salaries and taxes; as a result, these costs are often paid
less attention. In many commercial buildings, there are split incentives: If leases include energy expenses as a mark-up on the utility’s bill, then the owner has little reason to promote efficient operations in the tenants’ spaces. Finally, New York City’s elaborate codes and laws governing buildings have overwhelmingly focused on assuring health and safety, rather than energy efficiency.
That said, there are some initiatives aimed at improving operations
and maintenance in New York City buildings. For example, the U.S.
Green Building Council’s LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations and
Maintenance program provides nationally recognized certification that a building is being run efficiently.  So does the U.S. Energy Star program for buildings.
On the training front, local labor unions have established a
wide variety of programs, including the Service Employees International Union’s Local 32BJ’s Thomas Shortman Training Program and the associated 1000 Green Supers initiative. Other training programs include Local 94 Operating Engineers’ suite of training courses, and the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 30’s Apprentice Training and Skill Improvement Training courses. These have all provided valuable improvements in the capabilities of New York City’s building operators.
The proposals in this section would increase awareness of energy use
by tenants and building operators. If approved, meters will be required to measure electricity use by major systems and tenant spaces, and automated energy tracking will be required for new, large buildings.
Ready access to this information would increase the attention placed
on energy efficiency and speed the detection of leaks and other
malfunctions. One proposal would establish reasonable limits on heating and cooling temperatures, hopefully putting an end to the need to wear sweaters inside of freezing movie theatres during the dog days of summer.
Finally, the proposals aim to improve building operations and maintenance through the training of building operators, regular
inspections, and periodic tune-ups of building systems.
GREEN Awareness = Efficiency
New York State studies have shown that metering tenant electrical use
in a multi-famliy building can reduce apartment electricity consumption by approximately 17%-27%.
EO 1
Re-tune Large Buildings
Every Seven Years
Issue: Even the best-designed building systems drift away
from optimal performance over time, due to broken
parts, changes in use, and the accumulation of small
changes in procedures and equipment.
Recommendation: Every seven years, buildings larger than 50,000
square feet must be retro-commissioned, retuning the major building systems to ensure they all work together correctly. A similar proposal was incorporated into the Greener, Greater Buildings Plan, which became law prior to the issuance of this report.
EO 2
Measure Electricity Use in Tenant Spaces
Issue: Because electricity is often unmetered in
commercial tenant spaces, tenants are unaware of
the energy they consume. This, in turn, can lead to
excessive use and waste.
Recommendation: All new commercial tenant spaces of 10,000 square feet or larger shall be metered for electricity. A
similar proposal was incorporated into the Greener,
Greater Buildings Plan, which became law prior to
the issuance of this report.
EO 3
Train Building Operators in Energy Efficiency
Issue: Current requirements for building operators do
not include training in efficient building operations,
energy efficiency, or monitoring of overall building
performance.
Recommendation: In buildings larger than 50,000 square feet, require operators to be trained and certified for energyefficient
operations. Fund a study to establish the
appropriate training and certification requirements.

Energy Benchmarking – Retail

Source: ONRL.GOV

Retail Store’s Energy Performance

To rate your building, use the national plot below:

  1. Locate your building’s annual total energy use intensity on the x-axis.
  2. Move up vertically to the curve and then left to the y-axis for your rating –
    the percent of similar buildings in the nation less efficient than yours.
Energy use intensity distributions of U.S.
retail stores by region
(cumulative histograms)
The lower your percentage rating, the higher your building’s potential for energy use and cost reductions. If your building ranks below 30%, there is often large energy cost savings available through improved energy management or building/system upgrades. Substantial opportunities are also often achievable for buildings rating between 30 and 50%. Recognize that a high rating does not always guarantee high savings potential. If your building has significantly longer operating hours, higher occupant density (people/sq. ft.), or lots of computers in comparison to its peers, it may appear inefficient (low rating). In most buildings, however, these types of situations are not significant enough to make a dramatic difference in the percentile rating for an individual building.Using your energy use rating, you can estimate your energy use and cost reduction potentials from the link: