Action-Oriented Benchmarking

Identify and Prioritize Efficiency Opportunities

in Commercial Buildings

Paul Mathew
Staff Scientist
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Berkeley, California
 Recent Policy
y Developments
p

 California
– AB1103 requires benchmarking of all commercial buildings at time of lease
or sale.
– Executive order S-20-04 requires benchmarking of all state buildings.
– SB1 requires buildings applying for solar incentives to benchmark energy
use intensity.
 Federal
– EISA 2007 requires benchmarking of federal buildings to track performance
of energy goals.
 Other
– Minnesota requires
q all state buildings
g to be benchmarked.
– Many organizations requiring LEED-EB, which requires benchmarking.
 Europe
– Energy Performance of Buildings Directive requires energy performance to
be publicly displayed.
 Making Performance Visible
Display Energy Certificates
C f ((DECs)
C ) in the UK
 Many Applications for
E
Energy Benchmarking
B h ki
high
Property Valuation
marking Accuracy
ples”)

Recognition
programs
ples to app
A

Identify efficiency
nergyStar

opportunities
Set and track
building/portfolio
Benchm

Set system
En
(“app

targets efficiency targets

Identify “outliers” Action-oriented benchmarking

low
Campus Building System Component

Granularity
G l it
 Action Oriented Benchmarking
A hi
hierarchy
h off metrics
t i can help
h l identify
id tif potential
t ti l actions
ti

Site kWh/sq.m-yr Overall potential for building-wide energy efficiency

Ventilation
Potential for energy efficiency in ventilation system
kWh/sq.m-yr

Air change Potential to reduce energy use through operational practices

(l/s)/sq.m e.g. by optimizing ventilation rates
Vent. Efficiency Potential to reduce energy use through
W/(l/s) ventilation system efficiency improvements

Fan Efficiency
%
Potential to improve fan efficiency

Pressure drop
Pa Potential to reduce system pressure drop

Fume hood Impact of fume hoods on ventilation energy use

density

Sash Closure Effectiveness of VAV fume hood sash management

ratio

Cooling
kW/ton
 Ventilation System Airflow Efficiency
Metrics Pressure Drop (in
(in. w
w.g)
g)
Efficiency (W/cfm)

Benchmarks Standard: 9.7” ; 0.9 W/cfm

Good: 6.2” ; 0.6 W/cfm
Better: 3.2” ; 0.3 W/cfm

standard
good
better

Actions
A ti Low
L pressure ddrop d
design
i
Efficient fans (motors, belts, drives)
 Action-oriented benchmarking
extends
t d whole-building
h l b ildi benchmarking
b h ki
Whole Building Action-Oriented Investment-Grade
Energy
gy Benchmarking
g Energy
gy Benchmarking
g Energy Audit

Screen facilities for overall Identifies and prioritizes Estimates savings and cost
potential specific opportunities for specific opportunities

Minimal data requirements Requires end-use data and Requires detailed data
( tilit bill
(utility bills, floor
fl area, etc.)
t ) system features ll ti
collection, costt estimation,
ti ti
financial analysis
Highly applicable for RCx
and CCx Necessary for retrofits with
capital
p investments
 LBNL Benchmarking Survey
Importance of Metrics
Action-oriented 0 1 2 3 4 5

Benchmarking g Whole-building metrics

((e.g.
g energy/ft2)
gy/ )
4.17

User Surveys System or end-use metrics

(e.g. lighting energy/ft2)
3.83

N = 88
Peak electricity demand
• Existing benchmarking practices metrics (e.g. watts/ft2)
3.59

• Features desired in action-oriented tool

Energy cost metrics (e.g.
3.67
energy expenditures/ft2)
•101 respondents out ~500 stakeholders
"Important"
Very good (20%) response rate; virtually all Energy-related emissions
metrics (e.g. greenhouse- 3.20
questions answered by each respondent gas emissions/ft2)
Respondents represent 554 million square
Energy productivity metrics
feet of space directly influenced (e.g. energy 2.87
expenditures/customer)

LBNL Action-Oriented Benchmarking Survey

LBNL Action-Oriented Benchmarking Survey Willingness to Spend Time Gathering/Entering
Reasons for Energy Benchmarking Data
35%

100% 31% N = 85
88%
30%
90% N = 89 27%
79% 25%
80% 25%
72%
70%

60% 20%

50%
15%
40%
11%
30% 26% 10%
7%
20%
5%
10%

0% 0%
Rating Identifying energy Prioritizing Other up to 30 31-60 minutes 61-90 minutes 91-120 minutes > 120 minutes
(comparisions to efficiency investments in
minutes
other facilities) opportunities energy savings
Energy IQ
 EnergyIQ
gy Q Goals and Premises

1. Craft an AOB process that pairs “you-are-here”

you are here benchmarking with
pointers to actions to reduce energy use, cost, and emissions.
2. Serves as bridge between conventional benchmarking and full audit
or simulation study.
3. Enable (and motivate) users to select the peer group, metrics, and
views that have meaning for them.
4. “Features” benchmarking is useful in addition to traditional “Energy”
benchmarking.
benchmarking
5. Offer benchmarking on the fly - only enter as much data as needed
for desired results.
6
6. Build AOB system as a web service so that third parties (public or
private) can build custom applications for their constituencies
7. Complement and interoperate with existing methods (e.g. Energy
Star Portfolio Manager)
 Peer Comparison
p Datasets

 CEUS - California
– 2800 facilities
– On-site survey of building features
– End use data from calibrated simulation models
 CBECS - National
– 5215 facilities
– Less data on building features than CEUS
– End use data from regression models
 Other datasets (future)
– High tech buildings – labs, cleanrooms, datacenters
– User data
 EnergyIQ
gy Q Project
j Team

 LBNL (prime)
– Evan Mills, Paul Mathew, Martin Stoufer, Chris Havstad
 Usabilityy ((usabilityy analysis,
y , user interface))
– Kath Straub, Karen Fojas Lee, Vinit Jain, Amy Sullivan
 Itron (simulation module)
– Robert
R b tR Ramirez,
i T
Tom M
Mayer
 uTest (testing)
 William Bordass (expert review)
 Energy IQ
demo
http://energyiq.lbl.gov/
 Summary
y

 AOB provides quantitative measures for efficiency at

building and system level
– Design: incorporate benchmarks in program documents
– Operations:
Operations use
se benchmarks to evaluate
e al ate and track
performance over time.

 AOB is not “audit in a box”

– AOB helps identify potential actions and prioritize areas for
more detailed analysis and audits.
 Get Started with Action Oriented
B
Benchmarking
h ki ini Your
Y Organization
O i ti

 Define purpose of energy benchmarking

 Set up benchmarking system
– Select metrics
– Set benchmarks (levels of performance)
– Set up practical data collection and analysis strategy
 Consider integration with existing non
non-energy
energy
benchmarking systems or KPIs
 Define how information will be used
– Benchmarking is a means to an end…. What will be done
with the information?

http://energyiq.lbl.gov/
 Questions?

Paul Mathew Evan Mills

(510) 486-5116 (510) 486-6784
pamathew@lbl.gov emills@lbl.gov