ID#2559 made on
EAc1 - Optimize energy performance
LEED BD+C: New Construction
Our project is a new industrial building in Suzhou, China. The project consists of 8,000 2 of office area and 49,587m2 of production area. The production area includes welding machines, cranes, assemb...
Our project is a new industrial building in Suzhou, China. The project consists of 8,000 2 of office area and 49,587m2 of production area. The production area includes welding machines, cranes, assembly and painting machines. The electricity required by the process machines represents approximately 60% of total energy cost. According to LEED NC 2.2 Reference Guide, project teams may follow the Exceptional Calculation Method to document measures that reduce process loads. Pursuant to EAc1 CIR posted on 9 May, 2008, the process loads would be firstly modeled identically in the Baseline and Design Cases, using ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Appendix G Performance Rating Method, and then the manufacturing portion will be modified in a proposed Exceptional Calculation Method. Those two energy saving results will be combined to fill out the EAc1 Submittal Template and come up with overall cost savings for the whole project. The CIR is looking for verification on the methodology used in Exceptional Calculation to calculate the process loads of baseline and design cases Process Baseline Case: The welder machine A in the baseline is a standard welding machine in this industry and is widely used. Welder A is very reliable and last more than 20 years. The project owner has purchased hundreds of welder A and has used them in most of global factories, including Cat Peoria, Ill., Cat Decatur, Ill., Cat Aurora, Ill., Cat Joliet, Ill., Cat Atlanta, Georgia, Cat Minneapolis, Minnesota, Cat UK - Peterlee, Cat Work Tools, Kansas, Cat Mexico, Monterrey, Cat Brazil - Piracicaba, Cat China - Xuzhou, etc. The performance of welder A will be evaluated based on factory testing. Process Design Case: A brand new welder named welder B will be applied in design case, which is capable of saving considerable amounts of input powers. The machine was designed from the ground up for our client's specific application, so the market penetration now is zero. Welder B was tested exactly in the same way as Welder A. The testing result shows that the idle watts and arch input power of Power+ are all lower than welder A. Calculation: Given the same local electricity utility rate and same operation schedule (12 hours of arc hours and 12 hours of idle hours per day, 250 working days per year), the difference between annual electricity consumptions of welder A and B would be the process energy saving. Credit Interpretation Request: Please confirm that our assumptions and methods for calculating the process energy load for baseline and design case are acceptable for EAc1.
The description of the method for calculating and determining process energy savings appears reasonable. To be consistent with previous credit interpretation rulings, the submission documentation would need to follow guidance from EAc1 CIR ruling dated 02/09/2009.
Please note, the baseline should be established on the basis of the current industry wide practice and not the project owner's past practices. In addition, note that a maximum of 4 EAc1 energy points can be awarded for process energy savings.
*Please note (added 4/1/2010)*: Projects are eligible to claim more than 4 points from process energy efficiency savings. This guidance supersedes CIR 2/9/2009 which placed 4 point maximum limit on process energy savings. Applicable Internationally; China.
Related Addenda (Corrections & Interpretations)