w1 01 energy efficiency standards and the dod · pdf fileenergy-efficiency standards and green...
TRANSCRIPT
5/29/15
1
Presented by Cameron Oskvig
Director of Federal Facili>es Council, Na>onal Academies
Energy-Efficiency Standards and Green Building Certification Systems Used by the Department of Defense for Military Construction and Major Renovation
Outline
• Scope • The NRC and Process • CommiHee Task and Composi>on • Approach • DoD Opera>ng Environment • Policies, Standards, and Cer>fica>on Systems • Review and Findings • Recommended Approaches • Current Prac>ce
5/29/15
2
Scope
• Na#onal Defense Authoriza#on Act for Fiscal Year 2012 Sec. 2830 Basic Requirements – Cost-‐benefit analysis – Return on investment (ROI) – Long-‐term payback (PB)
A. American Society of Hea>ng, Refrigera>ng and Air-‐Condi>oning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 189.1-‐2011 for the Design of High-‐Performance, Green Buildings Except Low-‐Rise Residen>al
B. ASHRAE Energy Standard 90.1-‐2010 for Buildings Except Low-‐Rise Residen>al
C. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver, Gold, and Pla>num cer>fica>on for green buildings, as well as the LEED Volume cer>fica>on
D. Other American Na>onal Standards Ins>tute (ANSI)-‐accredited standards
National Academy of Sciences (1863) National Academy of Engineering (1964) Institute of Medicine (1970) National Research Council (1916)
Na>onal Academies
Congressionally-‐chartered, private nonprofit independent, objec-ve advice to the government, public, scien-fic, and engineering communi-es on issues of science and technology
5/29/15
3
Principal BICE Focus Areas The Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment (BICE) addresses ques>ons of technology, science, and public policy applied to the rela>onships between the constructed and natural environments. • Human factors and the built environment • Infrastructure and community building • Sustainable design • Project management methods • Construc>on methods and materials • Security of facili>es and cri>cal infrastructure • Mul>-‐hazard mi>ga>on methods
Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment
NRC Study Process
Preliminary Project Discussions
Study Scope Finalized and
Proposal Prepared Proposal Accepted
by Sponsor
CommiHee Appointed
CommiHee Ac>vi>es
Report Available for Review
Report Undergoes Peer Review
Review Comments Addressed
Report Available for Release
5/29/15
4
CommiHee Task
1. Conduct a literature review that synthesizes the state-‐of-‐the-‐knowledge about the costs and benefits, return on investment, and long-‐term payback of specified design standards related to sustainable buildings.
2. Evaluate a consultant-‐generated methodology and analysis of the cost-‐benefit, return on investment, and long-‐term payback for specified building design standards and evaluate the consultant’s applica>on of the methodology using empirical data from DOD buildings.
3. Iden>fy poten>al factors and approaches that the DOD should consider in developing a comprehensive strategy for its en>re poraolio of facili>es that includes standards for energy efficiency and sustainable design
CommiHee Composi>on
COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE ENERGY-‐EFFICIENCY AND SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS USED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND REPAIR • MICHAEL R. JOHNSON, University of Arkansas,
FayeHeville, Chair • PAUL FISETTE, University of MassachuseHs, Amherst • CHRIS HENDRICKSON, Carnegie Mellon University,
PiHsburgh, Pennsylvania • ROSALIE RUEGG, TIA Consul>ng, Inc., Emerald Isle,
North Carolina • MAXINE L. SAVITZ, Honeywell, Inc. (re>red), Los
Angeles, California • THOMAS P. SEAGER, Arizona State University, Tempe • ADRIAN TULUCA, Viridian Energy and Environmental,
Norwalk, Connec>cut Staff • LYNDA STANLEY, Study Director, Board on
Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment (BICE) • HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Associate, BICE • TERI THOROWGOOD, Administra>ve Coordinator, BICE
5/29/15
5
Evaluated Consultant Report
Consultant’s Report: Cost EffecEveness Study of Various Sustainable Building Standards in Response to NDAA 2012 SecEon 2830 Requirements Dr. Sarah Slaughter
• Assessment • Data Collec>on from ASHRAE, USGBC, GBI • Analysis for Net Savings, (Adjusted) ROI, Payback • Test Applicability for DOD Military Construc>on and Renova>on • Input to DOD Comprehensive Strategy Going Forward
AnalyEcal
Input Baseline and Alterna>ves: • Investments • OM&R data Data Template
Sensi>vity Analysis: • Study Periods • Discount Rates • Escala>on Rates
Present Value CalculaEon
Poraolio View across All Alterna>ves: Master Graphs
• Net Savings with Scenario Analysis
• Return on Investment (ROI) • Payback
• Threshold for Net Savings with Scenario Analysis
• Ranking by Return on Investment (ROI)
• Comparison of Payback
Prototype Building and Loca>ons
“Small Hotel” (Similar to Barracks) 43,200 SF, 4 floors “Medium Office” (Similar to Administra>on Buildings) 53,600 SF, 3 floors
Benefit-‐Cost Categories
Investment: Ini>al Investment + Major Repair/Replace
Required repor>ng • Energy: Building, suppor>ng facili>es/site • Water: Building supply, wastewater, site • Solid Waste: Municipal, hazardous
Expected OM&R Benefits Opera>ons and Maintenance: • General O&M • Building Cleaning • Landscaping
Assessment Approaches
SOURCE: Slaughter, Sarah, “Cost Effec>veness Study of Various Sustainable Building Standards in Response to NDAA2012 Sec>on 2830 Requirements.”
5/29/15
6
DoD Opera>ng Environment
Department of Defense Real Property
PorVolio
• 48 countries • 523 installaEons • 4,855 sites • 562,600 buildings and structures • 24.7M acres • $847B value • 2.3 million military and civilian
employees
• $15 Billion Annual O&M spending • $3.4 billion energy spending ∼ 1% of
naEon’s site delivered energy
1970s
1974, Federal Energy Administra>on Act 19
80s
1990s
1991, Energy Management Policy 2000s
2005 Energy Policy Act 2006 Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act 2009 Execu>ve Order 13514
2010s
2011 Na>onal Defense Authoriza>on Act (NDAA) 2013 Department of Defense Sustainable Buildings Policy 2015 Execu>ve Order 13693 -‐ Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade
Timeline of Federal Policy and Green Building Cer>fica>on Systems Criteria Versions
1970s
1980s
1990s
1998 LEED v1.0
2000s
2000 LEED v.2.0 2004 Green Globes 2005 LEED EB 2005 LEED EB & NCv2.2 2009 LEED NCv2009
2010s
2010 ANSI/GBI 01-‐2010: Green Building Assessment Protocol for Commercial Buildings 2011 GBI Guiding Principles Compliance Program (GPC) 2013 LEED v4
SOURCE: Waleski, J., Leveridge, A., Schonefeld, B. Solether, J. “Quan>fying the Integra>on of LEED ra>ngs to Military High Performance Sustainable Buildings,” CATEE 2013
Policy and Standards Timeline
5/29/15
7
Federal Policies Drivers Date DescripEon and Requirements
Energy Policy Act 2005 Defines goals & standards for reducing energy use in exis>ng and new federal buildings. Federal agencies to purchase 7.5% of their energy from renewable sources by 2013
Energy Independence & Security Act (EISA)
2007
Establishes goals and criteria for: High Performance Federal Buildings, Energy Reduc>on for exis>ng Federal Buildings, Federal Building Energy Efficiency Performance, Storm Water Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects, Energy Efficiency in Federal Buildings
Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings
Jan, 2006 Includes: Employing integrated design principles, op>mizing energy performance in exis>ng buildings, protec>ng and conserving water, enhancing indoor environmental quality, and Reducing environmental impact of building materials.
ExecuEve Order 13423 Strengthening Federal Env., Energy, and TransportaEon Management
Jan, 2007 Requires a reduc>on of energy intensity by 3% per year (2003 baseline to 2015)
ExecuEve Order 13514 Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance
Oct, 2009 Requires agencies to measure, manage, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions toward agency-‐defined targets
U.S. General Services AdministraEon’s (GSA) Review of Green Building CerEficaEon Systems (GBCS)
Oct. 2013 Agencies Should Choose between U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver ra>ng or 2 Green Globes from the Green Building Ini>a>ve green building cer>fica>on system
ExecuEve Order 13653 Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change
Nov, 2013 Requires adapta>on planning , annual Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan, and supports investment in climate resilient infrastructure
ExecuEve Order 13693 Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade
March, 2015 Cut the federal government's greenhouse gas emissions 40% over the next decade (from 2008 levels) and increase the share of electricity the federal government consumes from renewable sources to 30%
DoD Policies Drivers Date DescripEon and Requirements
InstallaEon Energy Policy Goals for the Department of Defense
Nov, 2005
• 30% reduc>on of facility generated greenhouse gases in 2010 from 1990 base; • Annual energy and water audits for 10% of the facili>es on an Installa>on; • Water Management Plans with best management prac>ces on 30% of its facili>es
by 2006, 50% by 2008 and 80% by 2010 • Expansion of renewable energy use within its facili>es with 5% goal by 2012 and
7.5% by 2013 NaEonal Defense AuthorizaEon Act 2007 Requires that 25% of total DoD electricity come from renewable sources by 2025
Department of Defense Sustainable Buildings Policy
Nov, 2013
Defined DoD UFC 1-‐200-‐02, High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements as minimum requirements for planning design and construc>on, renova>on, repair, maintenance and opera>on, and equipment installa>on • DoD Components to establish auditable process to ensure new buildings and major
renova>on meet requirements in UFC and includes green-‐building cer>fica>ons approved for federal use pursuant to sec>on 436(h) of EISA
DoD UFC 1-‐200-‐02 Unified FaciliEes Criteria (UFC) High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements
March, 2013 Nov, 2014
• Minimum requirements for new construc>on and major renova>ons are to comply with the Guiding Principles and to achieve at least a LEED Silver ra>ng or its equivalent
5/29/15
8
Green Building Standards
ASHRAE Energy Standard 90.1-‐2010 for Buildings Except Low-‐Rise ResidenEal Buildings • Establishes minimum energy efficiency requirements for buildings for
design, construc>on, and a plan for opera>on and maintenance; and for u>liza>on of on-‐site, renewable energy sources – 30% energy savings compared to 90.1-‐2004
ASHRAE Standard 189.1-‐2011 for the Design of High-‐Performance Green Buildings Except Low-‐Rise ResidenEal Buildings • Addresses site sustainability, water use efficiency, energy use efficiency,
indoor environmental quality and the building’s impact on the atmosphere, materials, and resources
Issues Problema>c with DoD Opera>ng Environment • Heat Island Effect ReducEon • Renewable Power Space AllocaEon • Minimum Side LighEng • Maximum waste generaEon • Plans for OperaEon
Green Building Cer>fica>on Systems
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) v3 (currently LEED v4) • 100-‐point weighted ra>ng system according to perceived environmental impact that is
associated with specific credit categories • The basic framework involves registra>on, applica>on, submission, review and cer>fica>on • 4 levels of cer>fica>on (Cer>fied (40+, Silver 50+, Gold 60+, Pla>num 80+) requires sa>sfying
a different number of earned points which are awarded as a cumula>ve total for each performance category in the ra>ng
Green Globes • Assessment is based upon award of points for different building characteris>cs. • Cer>fica>on is based upon a web-‐based, interac>ve ques>onnaire and a third party onsite
assessment • Four different levels (represented by one to four green globes) with 35-‐54 percent for one
globe, 55-‐69 percent two globes, 70-‐84 percent three globes and 85-‐100 percent four globes
Green Building CerEficaEon Systems are framework for designing and construc>ng buildings that meet sustainability (performance) objec>ves. Different from building standards in that they: • Provide a measure of a building’s effect on the environment • Provide a verifiable method and framework • Document progress toward a design or opera>onal performance target • Document the design and opera>ons outcomes and/or strategies being used in the building
5/29/15
9
Comparison and Issues
SOURCE: Wang, N., K. Fowler, and R. Sullivan. 2012. Green Building Cer>fica>on System Review. PNNL-‐20966 Pacific Northwest Na>onal Laboratory for U.S. DOE. March. Available at hHp://www.gsa.gov/graphics/ogp/Cert_Sys_Review.pdf. Accessed October 9, 2012.
Green Globes LEED One Globe (>35%) Cer>fied -‐-‐ 26 to 32 points (>37%) Two Globes (>55%) Silver -‐-‐ 33 to 38 points (>47%) Three Globes (>70%) Gold -‐-‐ 39 to 51 points (>56%) Four Globes (>85%) Pla>num -‐-‐52 to 69 points (>75%) SOURCE: Bryan, H., and J. Skopek. 2008. A Comparison of Two Environmental Ra>ng Systems Using Dual Cer>fied Buildings. Presented at the Sustainable Building 2008 (SB08) Conference. September 21-‐25. Melbourne, Australia. Available at hHp://www.thegbi.org/green-‐resource-‐library/pdf/Final-‐SB-‐2008-‐LEED-‐GG-‐paper.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2012. (based on LEED v.2 69 point system)
Comparison of Cer>fica>on Systems Using Dual Cer>fied Buildings
Green Globes LEED New Construction 25 of 27 20 of 27 Existing Buildings 22 of 28 27 of 28
Alignment of Cer>fica>on Systems to Federal Sustainable Design Requirements
RaEng systems alone will not be sufficient to reduce energy and water use to the levels required by federal mandates
Review of Consultants Report
• Because of limita>ons in data could not support the findings of NPV
• Does support using lifecycle costs in Business Case methodology to priori>ze green building goals in terms of cost-‐effec>veness (using a cost-‐effec>veness analysis supported as needed by cost-‐benefit analysis).
• Effec>ve baselines would be required
5/29/15
10
Literature Research
Benefits and Costs of Green Building Cer>fica>ons Systems
Energy 5%-‐30% less than conven>onal construc>on Water 8%-‐11% less water Opera>onal Cost Sugges>ve evidence of lower opera>onal costs Indoor Air Quality Sugges>ve evidence of beHer indoor air quality Design Cost to design 0% to 8% greater
Findings
Finding 1. The commiHee did not idenEfy any research studies that conducted a tradiEonal cost-‐benefit analysis to determine the long-‐term net present value savings, return on investment, or long-‐term payback related to the use of ASHRAE Energy Standard 90.1-‐2010, ASHRAE Standard 189.1-‐2011 for the Design of High-‐Performance, Green Buildings, the LEED or Green Globes green building cer>fica>on systems.
5/29/15
11
Findings
Finding 2. There is some limited evidence to indicate that provisions within ASHRAE Standard 189.1-‐2011 may need to be selecEvely adopted if use of this standard is to be cost effecEve in the DOD operaEng environment.
Findings
Finding 3. Research studies indicate that the incremental costs to design and construct high-‐performance or green buildings range from 0 to 8 percent higher than the costs to design and construct nongreen buildings, depending on the methodology used in the study and the type of building analyzed. The addiEonal incremental costs to design and construct high-‐performance or green buildings are relaEvely small when compared to total life-‐cycle costs.
5/29/15
12
Findings
• Finding 4. The analyEcal approach proposed by the DOD consultant has merit as a decision support tool in the DOD operaEng environment if appropriate and verifiable data are available for conduc>ng benefit-‐cost and sensi>vity analyses.
Findings
• Finding 5. The evidence from the literature search indicates that high-‐performance or green buildings can result in significant reducEons in energy use and water use. The cost savings associated with the reduc>ons of energy and water use will vary by geographic region, by climate zone, and by building type.
5/29/15
13
Findings
Finding 6. Not every individual high-‐performance or green building achieved energy or water savings when compared to similar nongreen buildings.
Findings
• Finding 7. In general, the quanEEes of energy and water used by a building once it is in operaEon are greater than the quanEEes of energy and water predicted by building design models, if these models are specifically created for compliance with LEED, Green Globes or ASHRAE Standards.
5/29/15
14
Findings
Finding 8. The DOD has the opportunity to con>nue to take a leadership role in improving the knowledge base about high-‐performance buildings, improving decision-‐support tools, and improving building models, by collecEng data on measured energy, water, and other resource use for its porVolio of buildings and by collabora>ng with others.
Findings
Finding 9. EffecEve operaEon of high-‐performance buildings requires well-‐trained faciliEes managers.
5/29/15
15
Recommended Approaches
1. Con>nue to require that new buildings or major renova>ons be designed to achieve a LEED-‐Silver or equivalent ra>ng in order to meet the mul>ple objec>ves embedded in laws and mandates related to high-‐performance buildings
2. Retain flexibility to modify building standards and the applica>on of green building cer>fica>on systems in ways that are appropriate to the DOD opera>ng environment and mission
3. Put policies and resources in place to measure the actual performance of DOD’s high-‐performance, green, and nongreen buildings to meet mul>ple objec>ves
4. Use investment approaches that analyze the total cost of ownership, a full range of benefits and costs, and uncertain future condi>ons as part of the decision making process.
5. Specify and fund training appropriate for facili>es managers to ensure the effec>ve opera>on of high-‐performance buildings
Current Prac>ce at DoD
• Improved mission capability through: – Reduced total ownership costs of
facili>es – Improved energy efficiency and water
conserva>on – Enhanced facility and installa>on
performance and sustainability – Promo>ng sustainable resource and
environmental stewardship – Enhance energy and water security
• Minimum requirements for new construc>on and major renova>ons – Comply with the Guiding Principles for
Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings (Guiding Principles)
– Achieve at least a LEED Silver ra>ng or equivalent
• ROI