Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Buildings”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 487 records · Page 27
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2014

Analysis of the Chinese Market for Building Energy Efficiency

China will account for about half of the new construction globally in the coming decade. Its floorspace doubled from 1996 to 2011, and Chinese rural buildings alone have as much floorspace as all of U.S. residential buildings. Building energy consumption has also grown, increasing by over 40% since 1990. To curb building energy demand, the Chinese government has launched a series of policies and programs. Combined, this growth in buildings and renovations, along with the policies to promote green buildings, are creating a large market for energy efficiency products and services. This report assesses the impact of China’s policies on building energy efficiency and on the market for energy efficiency in the future. The first chapter of this report introduces the trends in China, drawing on both historical analysis, and detailed modeling of the drivers behind changes in floorspace and building energy demand such as economic and population growth, urbanization, policy. The analysis describes the trends by region, building type and energy service. The second chapter discusses China’s policies to promote green buildings. China began developing building energy codes in the 1980s. Over time, the central government has increased the stringency of the code requirements and the extent of enforcement. The codes are mandatory in all new buildings and major renovations in China’s cities, and they have been a driving force behind the expansion of China’s markets for insulation, efficient windows, and other green building materials. China also has several other important policies to encourage efficient buildings, including the Three-Star Rating System (somewhat akin to LEED), financial incentives tied to efficiency, appliance standards, a phasing out of incandescent bulbs and promotion of efficient lighting, and several policies to encourage retrofits in existing buildings. In the third chapter, we take “deep dives” into the trends affecting key building components. This chapter examines insulation in walls and roofs; efficient windows and doors; heating, air conditioning and controls; and lighting. These markets have seen significant growth because of the strength of the construction sector but also the specific policies that require and promote efficient building components. At the same time, as requirements have become more stringent, there has been fierce competition, and quality has at time suffered, which in turn has created additional challenges. Next we examine existing buildings in chapter four. China has many Soviet-style, inefficient buildings built before stringent requirements for efficiency were more widely enforced. As a result, there are several specific market opportunities related to retrofits. These fall into two or three categories. First, China now has a code for retrofitting residential buildings in the north. Local governments have targets of the number of buildings they must retrofit each year, and they help finance the changes. The requirements focus on insulation, windows, and heat distribution. Second, the Chinese government recently decided to increase the scale of its retrofits of government and state-owned buildings. It hopes to achieve large scale changes through energy service contracts, which creates an opportunity for energy service companies. Third, there is also a small but growing trend to apply energy service contracts to large commercial and residential buildings. This report assesses the impacts of China’s policies on building energy efficiency. By examining the existing literature and interviewing stakeholders from the public, academic, and private sectors, the report seeks to offer an in-depth insights of the opportunities and barriers for major market segments related to building energy efficiency. The report also discusses trends in building energy use, policies promoting building energy efficiency, and energy performance contracting for public building retrofits.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Voltron Compatible Whole Building Root-Fault Detection and Diagnosis

Buildings consume more than 40% of primary energy in the U.S. Malfunctioning sensors, components, and control systems, as well as degrading components in Heating, Ventilating and Air-conditioning (HVAC) and lighting systems are main reasons for energy waste and unsatisfactory indoor environment. Field studies have shown that an energy saving of 5-30% of total building energy consumption and improved indoor air quality can be achieved by simply applying automated fault detection and diagnosis (AFDD), followed by corrections even if these are not done in real time. Extensive research has been made on the development of component level AFDD tools in the past two decades. However, in recent years, the development of method for a whole building level AFDD has received much attention. Here, a whole building fault refers to a fault happening in one subsystem but impact on more than one subsystems, or has a significant impact on building performances, such as building’s energy consumption. Existing component level AFDD tools could fail to detect or give false alarm for faults that trigger abnormalities in multiple subsystems. Isolating such whole building faults, which have impacts on multiple subsystems, is also challenging by simply using component based AFDD solutions. On the other hand, it might be more cost-effective for medium- or small-sized commercial buildings that have subsystems (e.g. primary cooling subsystem, air loop subsystem, heating subsystem, lighting subsystem, etc.) to install one whole building level AFDD tool, rather than many component level AFDD tools, to focus on significant faults. The focus of this project is firstly to provide training opportunities in building AFDD research area for undergraduate students and to develop a workforce pipeline in building sciences. The objective of the proposed research activities is to develop cost-effective and scalable AFDD solutions for whole building level faults. The developed AFDD solution is VOLTTRONTM compatible to further increase its plug-n-play capacity and the market penetration. VOLTTRONTM is an open-source innovative distributed control and sensing software platform developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. A VOLTTRONTM compatible AFDD tool brings the benefits such as low-cost deployment, and better building to grid integration, etc. The performance of the developed whole building AFDD tools is evaluated using data collected from a mixed-use medium-sized university campus building. Another significant goal of this project is to engage undergraduate students in research activities and expose them to building control and AFDD fields. A demonstration building – Nesbitt Hall at Drexel University is identified for this study. This demonstration building has a typical HVAC system configuration, which includes a water-cooled chiller system, three variable air volume (VAV) air handling unit (AHU) systems, and a hydronic heating system. Faults, that are expected to have a whole building level impact, are artificially implemented in this demonstration building for three different seasons. Building data have been collected in this project, which include fault free building automation system (BAS) data and BAS data that contain system behaviors caused by artificially implemented and naturally occurred faults. These collected data are used to evaluate the developed whole building AFDD tools. A data-driven method, which includes a weather and schedule-based pattern matching (WPM) method and Feature based Principal Component Analysis (FPCA) method, is developed for whole building level fault detection. Parameter sensitivity tests, including snapshot window size, data sample searching pool size, etc., are implemented to evaluate the impacts of various WPM-FPCA parameters. A data-driven and expert knowledge/rule-based method using Bayesian Network (BN) and WPM is developed for whole building level fault diagnosis. The developed WPM-BN method, which includes a two-layer BN structure model and BN parameters, are either learned from baseline data or developed from expert knowledge. The developed whole building AFDD tools are evaluated using BAS data collected from the demonstration building. Using the evaluation data set, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method is evaluated under two different Principle Component (PC) retention rates, i.e., 0.65 retention rate and 0.95 retention rate. It is observed that when using 0.65 PC retention rate, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method achieves a 79% fault detection rate (this rate reaches to 85% when including the six make-up fault test cases discussed in the next bullet), while when using 0.95 PC retention rate, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method achieves 100% fault detection rate (this rate remains to be 100% when including the six make-up fault test cases). Under both PC retention rates, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method demonstrates 0% false alarm rates. Using the evaluation data set, the developed WPM-BN fault diagnosis method has successfully diagnosed thirteen (13) faults out of the fourteen (14) fault test cases. The one mis-diagnosed case exhibits fewer fault symptoms in different subsystems, when compared with other fault test cases. Overall speaking, the developed whole building AFDD solutions demonstrate satisfactory fault detection/diagnosis accuracy with very low false alarm rate. Lastly, a survey and market study has been performed to understand the existing AFDD market, including its gaps and needs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Residential Building Energy Efficiency Field Studies: Low-Rise Multifamily

In recent years, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has conducted a series of research studies to validate energy efficient building technologies in the field. Much of the work has focused on single-family construction, and some has also addressed commercial energy codes. The work detailed in this DOE-funded study (EE0007616) focuses on low-rise multifamily buildings (three stories or fewer above grade) in various regions of the United States, and reports on how state-level building codes are being implemented, both in terms of observed characteristics and also in terms of estimated energy impacts. Nearly 100 buildings across four states—Illinois, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington—were sampled, which represent a range of climate types from mild temperature to very cold continental. Both common entry and outdoor entry buildings were included, and a parallel research project evaluated envelope air tightness and current still-evolving air tightness testing methods. Finally, a set of structured interviews of building designers and other relevant professionals was carried to out to gain more insight into this market. To the greatest extent possible, the methodology developed under the project for low-rise multifamily buildings mirrored the approach established by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for single-family residential buildings (https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/residential-building-energy-code-field-study). This included the general approach to sampling, recruitment, and data collection, as well as data analysis and presentation. The range of permitting dates for the sites encompassed two energy code cycles in most regions. All states in the study had adopted a variation of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) for the structure of their state code. The low-rise multifamily occupancy presents a hybrid building type: most of the building’s conditioned floor area was covered by the residential chapter of the code while portions of the building (such as corridors and common spaces) fell under the commercial code chapter. The key items assessed in this work were: Building Shell—exterior wall insulation, ceiling insulation, foundation insulation, windows. Common Areas—HVAC and lighting. Living Units—lighting, ventilation. A few items were not assessed in detail, given their relative paucity in this occupancy type; these included duct leakage, pipe insulation, and hot water circulation controls. Building characteristics were collected via a combination of architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing plan reviews and field inspections, and entered into a spreadsheet-based tool that was later queried to build a database. Data went through quality control both upon arrival and via a later semi-automated review and assurance process. Most of the data are presented graphically so that the reader can quickly assess compliance with the applicable energy codes (both by state and by code year). As a final step, EnergyPlus™ simulations were created for all buildings in the study to estimate both the as-found energy use intensity (EUI) and the energy and CO 2 that could be saved if features that were found to not meet code minimums were brought up to code. The savings estimates were tabulated for each of the four states in the study. The research team found that the single-family approach was largely applicable to low-rise multifamily buildings. This applies to both the data collection and the prototype EUI analysis. Most of the occupied space is living units and falls under residential energy codes, and many characteristics use similar envelope construction and relatively straightforward mechanical systems and lighting. One of the most challenging aspects of this work was to build an effective spreadsheet-based data collection instrument that could allow efficient collection of both building plan and field data. The research team is of the view that other methods could be equally effective if the work is done carefully with diligent quality control. The primary findings for the work center around the thermal envelope and mechanical systems and lighting at the sites: For thermal envelope components, the majority of buildings met or were better than the prescriptive code.This suggests that building designers and builders are aware of code requirements. In some cases, surveyed buildings were designed to qualify for energy efficiency certification programs. These buildings made up at least 20% of sampled buildings in each state. Almost all buildings met mechanical system efficiency requirements (for both living units and common areas). In some cases, sites employed systems that were considerably more efficient than required by the applicable energy code. Dwelling units had a majority of high-efficacy lighting, often in excess of the state’s residential code requirements. While high-efficacy fixtures were also typical in common areas (corridors and stairwells), lighting power densities (LPDs) in these areas were sometimes higher than levels dictated by the applicable part of the state commercial energy code. The simulation models run on a series of low-rise multifamily prototypes, informed by a composite of the field data collected, calculated annual EUIs of between 20 and 50 kBtu/ft2-yr, with the range representing the effects of both building characteristics and building location (climate zone). A detailed process (based on simulations of prototype buildings) was used to estimate the amount of avoided energy use that would occur if 100% adherence to energy codes were attained. The results indicated modest savings are attainable for items such as window thermal performance and common area lighting. The result is overall only a modest potential for additional energy savings, averaging about 10% of EUI.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Model America: Data and Models for every U.S. Building

The 5-year goal of the “Model America” concept was to generate a model of every building in the United States. This data repository delivers on that goal with "Model America v1". Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed the Automatic Building Energy Modeling (AutoBEM) software suite to process multiple types of data, extract building-specific descriptors, generate building energy models, and simulate them on High Performance Computing (HPC) resources. For more information, see AutoBEM-related publications (bit.ly/AutoBEM). There were 125,715,609 buildings detected in the United States. Of this number, 122,146,671 (97.2%) buildings resulted in a successful generation and simulation of a building energy model. This dataset includes the full 125 million buildings. Future updates may include additional buildings, data improvements, or other algorithmic model enhancements in "Model America v2". This dataset contains OSM and IDF zip files for every U.S. county. Each zip file contains the generated buildings from that county. The .csv input data contains the following data fields: 1. ID - the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), generated using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework 2. Centroid - building center location in latitude/longitude (from Footprint2D) 3. Footprint2D - building polygon of 2D footprint (lat1/lon1_lat2/lon2_...) 4. State_abbr - state name 5. Area - estimate of total conditioned floor area (ft2) 6. Area2D - footprint area (ft2) 7. Height - building height (ft) 8. NumFloors - number of floors (above-grade) 9. WWR_surfaces - percent of each facade (pair of points from Footprint2D) covered by fenestration/windows (average 14.5% for residential, 40% for commercial buildings) 10. CZ - ASHRAE Climate Zone designation 11. BuildingType - DOE prototype building designation (IECC=residential) as implemented by OpenStudio-standards 12. Standard - building vintage This data is made free and openly available in hopes of stimulating any simulation-informed use case. Data is provided as-is with no warranties, express or implied, regarding fitness for a particular purpose. We wish to thank our sponsors which include Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD), U.S. Dept. of Energy’s (DOE) Building Technologies Office (BTO), Office of Electricity (OE), Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Update (September 23, 2025): We corrected the ID field in all state-level.csv input files to ensure one-to-one consistency with the corresponding .osm and .idf output files. The schema and file structure are unchanged; only the values in the ID column were modified. No files were added or removed, and the .zip bundles (containing .osm / .idf) are unchanged. The corrected .csv inputs were re-extracted in March 2025 from the original data generated ~ 2021 (Theta supercomputer runs), and published here to align input IDs with model outputs. Update (September 6, 2026): The Model America dataset was updated to replace the previous building ID field with the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework. UBIDs provide standardized, location-based identifiers for individual building footprints and improve interoperability with other building and geospatial datasets. The data files containing the previous building identifiers were updated to include UBIDs. This update standardizes building identification; the underlying Model America building characteristics and energy simulation results were not recomputed as part of this update.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Development and Validation of Smart Building Technology Modules for Academic and Professional Education (Final Technical Report)

Smart building technologies can improve building energy efficiency and resilience, reduce carbon emissions, and provide load flexibility to the grid. However, in both college curricula and building professionals’ continuing education, there is a lack of systematic instruction on smart building technologies. Slipstream, partnering with Texas A&M University (TAMU), the Society of Building Science Educators (SBSE), and the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), developed a semester-long smart building curriculum for college students and 16 training videos for building professionals and the general public. The education and training cover the drivers and benefits of smart building technologies, key building energy systems, the latest sensor technologies and IoT devices, and focus on topics related to smart building controls (i.e., energy management information systems, smart building control platforms, cybersecurity, grid-interactive-efficient buildings [GEBs], smart building control methods, and occupant-centric control). The smart building curriculum for college students was taught at TAMU in the Spring semester of 2024 as part of the validation process. Student feedback was collected and summarized in a validation report by TAMU. The curriculum material was also reviewed by SBSE faculty who are interested in teaching smart building technology-related courses. Suggestions on revisions and better adoption of the materials by other faculty across the architectural, engineering, and construction (AEC) domains were compiled in a distinct validation report by SBSE. The SBSE validation report was used to create structured subsets of the curriculum material for adoption at different levels in different sub-disciplines. These subsets are categorized and offered on the SBSE website (https://www.sbse.org/courses/Smart-Building-Technologies). The 16 training videos for building professionals and the general public were previewed by 17 industry experts, and feedback and suggested changes were incorporated into the final version of these videos. The videos are organized into a smart building technology training course and published on the Whole Building Design Guide website (https://www.wbdg.org/ce/doe/bto/sbtt), which is hosted by the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). Project team members created marketing materials to promote the awareness of these free, publicly available education and training resources. Outreach and marketing activities included creating short promotional videos, building project webpages, making project announcements on social media, conducting an email campaign, and directly reaching out to faculties and building professionals. This report describes the project approach, provides outlines of the training materials, along with links to resources, and identifies lessons learned in creating the content. We also suggest ways to scale the instruction of smart building concepts to empower the workforce to accelerate the adoption of smart building technologies in the real world.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2014

Regional Analysis of Building Distributed Energy Costs and CO2 Abatement: A U.S. - China Comparison

The following paper conducts a regional analysis of the U.S. and Chinese buildings? potential for adopting Distributed Energy Resources (DER). The expected economics of DER in 2020-2025 is modeled for a commercial and a multi-family residential building in different climate zones. The optimal building energy economic performance is calculated using the Distributed Energy Resources Customer Adoption Model (DER CAM) which minimizes building energy costs for a typical reference year of operation. Several DER such as combined heat and power (CHP) units, photovoltaics, and battery storage are considered. The results indicate DER have economic and environmental competitiveness potential, especially for commercial buildings in hot and cold climates of both countries. In the U.S., the average expected energy cost savings in commercial buildings from DER CAM?s suggested investments is 17percent, while in Chinese buildings is 12percent. The electricity tariffs structure and prices along with the cost of natural gas, represent important factors in determining adoption of DER, more so than climate. High energy pricing spark spreads lead to increased economic attractiveness of DER. The average emissions reduction in commercial buildings is 19percent in the U.S. as a result of significant investments in PV, whereas in China, it is 20percent and driven by investments in CHP. Keywords: Building Modeling and Simulation, Distributed Energy Resources (DER), Energy Efficiency, Combined Heat and Power (CHP), CO2 emissions 1. Introduction The transition from a centralized and fossil-based energy paradigm towards the decentralization of energy supply and distribution has been a major subject of research over the past two decades. Various concerns have brought the traditional model into question; namely its environmental footprint, its structural inflexibility and inefficiency, and more recently, its inability to maintain acceptable reliability of supply. Under such a troubled setting, distributed energy resources (DER) comprising of small, modular, electrical renewable or fossil-based electricity generation units placed at or near the point of energy consumption, has gained much attention as a viable alternative or addition to the current energy system. In 2010, China consumed about 30percent of its primary energy in the buildings sector, leading the country to pay great attention to DER development and its applications in buildings. During the 11th Five Year Plan (FYP), China has implemented 371 renewable energy building demonstration projects, and 210 photovoltaics (PV) building integration projects. At the end of the 12th FYP, China is targeting renewable energy to provide 10percent of total building energy, and to save 30 metric tons of CO2 equivalents (mtce) of energy with building integrated renewables. China is also planning to implement one thousand natural gas-based distributed cogeneration demonstration projects with energy utilization rates over 70percent in the 12th FYP. All these policy targets require significant DER systems development for building applications. China?s fast urbanization makes building energy efficiency a crucial economic issue; however, only limited studies have been done that examine how to design and select suitable building energy technologies in its different regions. In the U.S., buildings consumed 40percent of the total primary energy in 2010 [1] and it is estimated that about 14 billion m2 of floor space of the existing building stock will be remodeled over the next 30 years. Most building?s renovation work has been on building envelope, lighting and HVAC systems. Although interest has emerged, less attention is being paid to DER for buildings. This context has created opportunities for research, development and progressive deployment of DER, due to its potential to combine the production of power and heat (CHP) near the point of consumption and delivering multiple benefits to customers, such as cost

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Model America - data and models of every U.S. building

The 5-year goal of the 'Model America' concept was to generate a model of every building in the United States. This data repository delivers on that goal. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed the Automatic Building Energy Modeling (AutoBEM) software suite to process multiple types of data, extract building-specific descriptors, generate building energy models, and simulate them on High Performance Computing (HPC) resources. For more information, see AutoBEM-related publications (bit.ly/AutoBEM). There were 125,714,640 buildings detected in the United States and this dataset contains 122,930,327 (97.8%) buildings which resulted in a successful simulation. Future, annual updates have been proposed that may include additional buildings, data improvements, or other algorithmic enhancements. This dataset of 122.9 million buildings includes: Models (state_county.zip) - OpenStudio (v3.1.0) and EnergyPlus (v9.4) building energy models. Please note that the download requires the free Globus Connect Personal (https://www.globus.org/globus-connect-personal); Each model has approximately 3,000 building input descriptors that can be extracted. Please see the EnergyPlus(v9.4) 2,784-page Input/Output Reference Guide (https://energyplus.net/sites/all/modules/custom/nrel_custom/pdfs/pdfs_v9.4.0/InputOutputReference.pdf) for everything that can be retrieved or simulated from these models. These models were derived from the following metadata, which is not included in this dataset: 1. ID - unique building ID 2. County - county name 3. State - state name 4. CZ - ASHRAE Climate Zone designation 5. Clim_Zone - text label of climate zone 6. est_year - estimated year of construction 7. est_commercial - estimated building type (0=residential, 1=commercial) 8. Centroid - building center location in latitude/longitude (from Footprint2D) 9. Footprint2D - building polygon of 2D footprint (lat1/lon1_lat2/lon2_...) 10. Height - building height (meters) 11. Area2D - footprint area (ft2) 12. BuildingType - DOE prototype building designation (IECC=residential) as implemented by OpenStudio-standards 13. WWR_surfaces - percent of each facade (pair of points from Footprint2D) covered by fenestration/windows (average 14.5% for residential, 40% for commercial buildings) 14. NumFloors - number of floors (above-grade) 15. Area - estimate of total conditioned floor area (ft2) 16. Standard - building vintage. These models are made free and openly available in hopes of stimulating any simulation-informed use case. Data is provided as-is with no warranties, express or implied, regarding fitness for a particular purpose. We wish to thank our sponsors which include Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD), U.S. Dept. of Energy's (DOE) Building Technologies Office (BTO), Office of Electricity (OE), Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). This research used resources of the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility, which is a DOE Office of Science User Facility supported under Contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. Please cite as: New, Joshua R., Adams, Mark, Bass, Brett, Berres, Anne, and Clinton, Nicholas (2021). 'Model America - data and models of every U.S. building. [Data set].' Constellation, doi.ccs.ornl.gov/ui/doi/339, April 14, 2021

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data Driven Commercial Building Energy Code Compliance and Technology Inventory for New York City

Building Performance Standards (BPS) are gaining national traction. A BPS will require new processes in the design, construction, and operation of buildings that take the occupants into account and enable predictive analysis to ensure compliance with current and future GHG emissions caps. In New York City, most buildings over 25,000 square feet will be regulated by a BPS starting in 2024, regardless of whether it is new construction permitted under current energy codes or an existing building. This research is one of the first to begin the evaluation of a long-term series of building policies in the context of an open data ecosystem, in cooperation with city agencies. Existing building policies enacted in NYC have ranged from building energy benchmarking and labeling to energy audits to the regulation of GHG emission in buildings. Through the development of a dataset related to building technologies and energy consumption, this project can help to evaluate if meaningful conclusions can be drawn for the data that has been largely self-reported in compliance with city regulations. This project will also provide lessons learned from a deep dive into these types of datasets to provide best practices for municipalities or states seeking to embark on policies like those enacted in NYC. In addition, a Building Automation System (BAS) Stretch Standard of Care (SSOC) for owners, designers, and building operators will enable the measurement and predictive analysis of energy consumption and GHG emissions at the plant, system, or component level, in anticipation of regulated GHG limits on buildings based on energy use. The SSOC is expected to be suitable for use on a national level. The primary feature of an SSOC is a standardized format for a set of BAS points that can be used to control and to gather data from individual plants, systems, or components that are related to building energy consumption. This project examined how measurements compare to prescriptive or simulation-based energy code targets, finding little correlation between predictive 8760-hour energy modeling and actual energy consumption for a small sample (n=27) of buildings constructed after 2015. Other analysis found that, while large multifamily housing (MFH) buildings showed a general trend similar to predicted reductions in energy use from the implementation of model commercial energy codes, this trend was not evident in the office, K-12 school, and hotel use groups in NYC. No upward or downward trends in energy consumption were found when buildings were grouped by size. Energy audit data were analyzed and it appears that there is bias by audit company on measures recommended to clients. Further research should be performed to cross-analyze this with other attributes, such as building size, vintage, and number of stories. Analysis found that for 281 buildings that were permitted and completed after 2015 and had submitted benchmarking data in 2022, between 81% and 96% (by use group) were found to be in compliance with the 2024 to 2029 NYC BPS emission caps, and between 55% and 89% were in compliance with the 2030-2034 caps. This work is beneficial to the public in helping policymakers and building stakeholders better understand the wide-ranging implications of a BPS.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Data and Analytics to Inform Energy Retrofit of High Performance Buildings

Buildings consume more than one-third of the world?s primary energy. Reducing energy use in buildings with energy efficient technologies is feasible and also driven by energy policies such as energy benchmarking, disclosure, rating, and labeling in both the developed and developing countries. Current energy retrofits focus on the existing building stocks, especially older buildings, but the growing number of new high performance buildings built around the world raises a question that how these buildings perform and whether there are retrofit opportunities to further reduce their energy use. This is a new and unique problem for the building industry. Traditional energy audit or analysis methods are inadequate to look deep into the energy use of the high performance buildings. This study aims to tackle this problem with a new holistic approach powered by building performance data and analytics. First, three types of measured data are introduced, including the time series energy use, building systems operating conditions, and indoor and outdoor environmental parameters. An energy data model based on the ISO Standard 12655 is used to represent the energy use in buildings in a three-level hierarchy. Secondly, a suite of analytics were proposed to analyze energy use and to identify retrofit measures for high performance buildings. The data-driven analytics are based on monitored data at short time intervals, and cover three levels of analysis ? energy profiling, benchmarking and diagnostics. Thirdly, the analytics were applied to a high performance building in California to analyze its energy use and identify retrofit opportunities, including: (1) analyzing patterns of major energy end-use categories at various time scales, (2) benchmarking the whole building total energy use as well as major end-uses against its peers, (3) benchmarking the power usage effectiveness for the data center, which is the largest electricity consumer in this building, and (4) diagnosing HVAC equipment using detailed time-series operating data. Finally, a few energy efficiency measures were identified for retrofit, and their energy savings were estimated to be 20percent of the whole-building electricity consumption. Based on the analyses, the building manager took a few steps to improve the operation of fans, chillers, and data centers, which will lead to actual energy savings. This study demonstrated that there are energy retrofit opportunities for high performance buildings and detailed measured building performance data and analytics can help identify and estimate energy savings and to inform the decision making during the retrofit process. Challenges of data collection and analytics were also discussed to shape best practice of retrofitting high performance buildings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Smart Building Technology Training Modules for Academic and Professional Education

Smart building technologies are a new suite of resources that improve building energy efficiency and resilience, reduce carbon emissions, and provide load flexibility to the grid. However, in both college curricula and building professionals’ continuing education, there is a lack of systematic instruction on smart building technologies–topics that include smart building concepts, key components, smart building controls, “Internet of Things” (IoT) devices, and how to integrate multiple energy systems including distributed energy resources (DER). This major gap in smart building education prevents stakeholders from understanding and adopting smart building technologies in building design and operations. Slipstream leads a DOE-funded project developing a semester-long smart building curriculum for college students and adapting the contents into 16 training videos for building professionals and the general public. The education and training cover the drivers and benefits of smart building technologies, key building energy systems, the latest sensor technologies and IoT devices, and focus on topics related to smart building controls (i.e., energy management information systems, smart building control platforms, cybersecurity, grid-interactive-efficient buildings (GEBs), smart building control methods, and occupant-centric control. This paper describes the project approach, provides outlines of the training materials, and identifies lessons learned in creating the content. We also suggest ways to scale the instruction of smart building concepts to empower the workforce to accelerate the adoption of smart building technologies in the real world.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Developing Smart Building Technology Modules to Enhance Workforce Preparedness: A Case for AI-Driven Academic and Professional Education

Smart building technologies are resources that improve building energy efficiency and resilience, reduce carbon emissions, and provide load flexibility to the grid. However, in both academic curricula and building professionals’ continuing education, there is a lack of systematic instruction on methods to integrate multiple energy systems including distributed energy resources (DER), smart building technologies, AI (Artificial Intelligence) tools and key concepts, components, and controls, including “Internet of Things” (IoT) devices. In today’s dynamic workforce, this major gap in smart building technology education prevents stakeholders from being able to attract talent with an understanding and preparation to adopt smart building technologies in building design and operations. A federally funded project included a partnership between Slipstream and Texas A&M University (TAMU) to develop a semester-long smart building curriculum for engineering college students with the ability to adapt the contents for workforce development of professionals in building services. The final product consists of 16 training videos adapted for building professionals and the public. The educational content and training materials cover the benefits of building energy systems, the latest sensor technologies and IoT devices, all with a focus on smart building technologies. The key drivers are on topics related to smart building controls (i.e., energy management information systems), smart building control platforms, cybersecurity, grid-interactive-efficient buildings (GEBs), smart building control methods, and occupant-centric control. Although not explicitly included the technologies nod to the need for AI driven technologies to prepare engineers and industry professionals to be future ready. This paper describes the project approach, provides outlines of the training materials, and identifies lessons learned in creating the content for this course. The authors suggest ways to scale the instruction of smart building concepts to empower the workforce to accelerate the adoption of smart building technologies and AI-based teaching and learning in higher education and building sector.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2015

Guidelines for Building Science Education

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) residential research and demonstration program, Building America, has triumphed through 20 years of innovation. Partnering with researchers, builders, remodelers, and manufacturers to develop innovative processes like advanced framing and ventilation standards, Building America has proven an energy efficient design can be more cost effective, healthy, and durable than a standard house. As Building America partners continue to achieve their stretch goals, they have found that the barrier to true market transformation for high performance homes is the limited knowledge-base of the professionals working in the building industry. With dozens of professionals taking part in the design and execution of building and selling homes, each person should have basic building science knowledge relevant to their role, and an understanding of how various home components interface with each other. Instead, our industry typically experiences a fragmented approach to home building and design. After obtaining important input from stakeholders at the Building Science Education Kick-Off Meeting, DOE created a building science education strategy addressing education issues preventing the widespread adoption of high performance homes. This strategy targets the next generation and provides valuable guidance for the current workforce. The initiative includes: • Race to Zero Student Design Competition: Engages universities and provides students who will be the next generation of architects, engineers, construction managers and entrepreneurs with the necessary skills and experience they need to begin careers in clean energy and generate creative solutions to real world problems. • Building Science to Sales Translator: Simplifies building science into compelling sales language and tools to sell high performance homes to their customers. • Building Science Education Guidance: Brings together industry and academia to solve problems related to building science education. This report summarizes the steps DOE has taken to develop guidance for building science education and outlines a path forward towards creating real change for an industry in need. The Guidelines for Building Science Education outlined in Appendix A of this report have been developed for external stakeholders to use to certify that their programs are incorporating the most important aspects of building science at the most appropriate proficiency level for their role. The guidelines are intended to be used primarily by training organizations, universities, and certification bodies. Each guideline can be printed or saved as a stand-alone document for ease-of-use by the respective stakeholder group. In 2015, DOE, with leadership from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), is launching a multi-year campaign to promote the adoption of the Guidelines for Building Science Education in a variety of training settings.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Whole-building life-cycle analysis with a new GREET® tool: Embodied greenhouse gas emissions and payback period of a LEED-Certified library

Embodied greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of building components and buildings operations need to be quantified to holistically address building sustainability. To evaluate embodied GHG emissions of buildings and to provide insights on building materials and building design decisions toward decarbonization, we have recently created a building life-cycle assessment (LCA) module in the widely used Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Technologies (GREET (R)) LCA model. We applied the GREET building LCA module to examine embodied GHG impacts and the payback period of a LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified public library in Chicago, USA. We developed localized, detailed life-cycle inventories to address individual building materials used in the library. We expanded the LCA system boundary to include the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing system, as well as refrigerant impacts, which are often ignored in previous studies. Results show that the total embodied GHG emissions are approximately 817 metric tons, or approximately 538 kg/m 2 . Sensitivity analysis highlights the positive role of increasing the use of recycled materials for reducing embodied GHG emissions. Sensitivity analysis on embodied GHG emissions payback periods shows the need to benchmark the embodied and operational carbon performance of buildings for comparison to alternative building designs and sustainability practices. Furthermore, this analysis demonstrates that building LCA models, such as the GREET building LCA module, which addresses embodied and operational GHG emission impacts of whole buildings holistically, could empower building architects, technology developers, manufacturers, and general contractors to address embodied and operational impacts holistically for building sustainability.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2014

A long-term, integrated impact assessment of alternative building energy code scenarios in China

China is the second largest building energy user in the world, ranking first and third in residential and commercial energy consumption. Beginning in the early 1980s, the Chinese government has developed a variety of building energy codes to improve building energy efficiency and reduce total energy demand. This paper studies the impact of building energy codes on energy use and CO2 emissions by using a detailed building energy model that represents four distinct climate zones each with three building types, nested in a long-term integrated assessment framework GCAM. An advanced building stock module, coupled with the building energy model, is developed to reflect the characteristics of future building stock and its interaction with the development of building energy codes in China. This paper also evaluates the impacts of building codes on building energy demand in the presence of economy-wide carbon policy. We find that building energy codes would reduce Chinese building energy use by 13% - 22% depending on building code scenarios, with a similar effect preserved even under the carbon policy. The impact of building energy codes shows regional and sectoral variation due to regionally differentiated responses of heating and cooling services to shell efficiency improvement.

Building energy codes↗
DOE OSTI2024

Mitigation for Removal of Building 01-103 in the Area 1 Subdock, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

Building 01-103, the Drill Bit Repair Building was originally recorded as SHPO Resource No. B18848 in 2020 during an architectural survey of the Area 1 Subdock (Collins et al. 2022). It was recommended individually eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criteria A and C and contributing to the significance of the Area 1 Subdock Historic District. The SHPO concurred with these determinations in a letter dated April 29, 2022 (Reed 2022). The Drill Bit Repair Building retains all seven aspects of integrity. The location, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association have not changed since its original construction. The design was modified slightly in 1996 with the addition of a removable and non-destructive chain-link fence. Nearby buildings 01-101 and 01-102 were removed (Collins and Menocal 2020) but the other buildings and storage yards remain. Therefore, the integrity of setting has been changed, but not to the degree that the building no longer conveys its significance (see Figures 4 and 5 for comparison). Building 01-103 was constructed in 1985 to coincide with the relocation of the Area 3 Subdock to Area 1. The design for the new Subdock provided a centralized cluster of buildings surrounded by two large storage yards. The buildings included administrative and engineering office space, warehouses, a radiograph building, and Building 01-103 as the drill bit maintenance and repair building, among others. The Drill Bit Repair Building was critical to the success of underground nuclear testing and is eligible under Criterion A for its contribution to broad patterns of history by maintaining specially designed equipment for underground nuclear testing at the NNSS. It is also eligible under Criterion C as it is the only recorded example of a facility built specifically for the maintenance of big-hole drill bits on the NNSS. As it retains both significance and integrity, it remains individually eligible under Criteria A and C. In addition to its individual significance, the Drill Bit Repair Building also contributes to the significance of the Area 1 Subdock Historic District as a representative of a big-hole drilling support facility necessary for underground nuclear testing. The building and the equipment therein were designed specifically for testing at the NNSS, where much of the early technology and methods for big-hole drilling were developed. Its removal will result in not only the demolition of a contributing element but also a change in the physical features of the district’s setting that contribute to its historic significance. The change in setting will diminish the district’s integrity. However, the district still contains numerous examples of other buildings constructed for the purpose of supporting big-hole drilling and remains eligible under Criteria A and C.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

A distributed decision framework for building clusters with different heterogeneity settings

In the past few decades, extensive research has been conducted to develop operation and control strategy for smart buildings with the purpose of reducing energy consumption. Besides studying on single building, it is envisioned that the next generation buildings can freely connect with one another to share energy and exchange information in the context of smart grid. It was demonstrated that a network of connected buildings (aka building clusters) can significantly reduce primary energy consumption, improve environmental sustainability and building s resilience capability. However, an analytic tool to determine which type of buildings should form a cluster and what is the impact of building clusters heterogeneity based on energy profile to the energy performance of building clusters is missing. To bridge these research gaps, we propose a self-organizing map clustering algorithm to divide multiple buildings to different clusters based on their energy profiles, and a homogeneity index to evaluate the heterogeneity of different building clusters configurations. In addition, a bi-level distributed decision model is developed to study the energy sharing in the building clusters. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed clustering algorithm and decision model, we employ a dataset including monthly energy consumption data for 30 buildings where the data is collected every 15 min. It is demonstrated that the proposed decision model can achieve at least 13% cost savings for building clusters. Furthermore, the results show that the heterogeneity of energy profile is an important factor to select battery and renewable energy source for building clusters, and the shared battery and renewable energy are preferred for more heterogeneous building clusters.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2022

Design Requirements and Software Specification for the Autonomous Energy Management Software System for Small Commercial Buildings

Commercial buildings are responsible for approximately 20 percent of the total United States energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Over 85 percent of these buildings lack building automation systems. Many of these buildings are small (<50,000 square feet), underserved, and use rooftop units for heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning needs. Because these buildings lack proper energy management systems, they have several operational deficiencies that lead to excess energy consumption. Studies have shown that managing the rooftop units heating and cooling set points, schedules, setbacks, and optimal start can result in 20 to 25 percent reduction in electricity consumption in small commercial buildings. In addition, improving demand flexibility of these buildings will result additional cost savings for the building owner. Therefore, the Department of Energy’s Building Technologies Office approved a project to address the needs for small commercial buildings. The project is led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) with Intellimation LLC as the cooperative research and development agreement partner. The primary goal of the project is to develop and validate an autonomous energy management software (AEMS) system that will continuously optimize small commercial building operations by minimizing energy consumption and cost, while providing a solution for maximizing decarbonization benefits from electrification of buildings. The work will leverage the vast experience of PNNL research and development staff who have over two decades of experience in developing and successfully transferring software technologies to the private sector. This solution will be jointly developed with Intellimation, a company that plans to use it to scale their building energy efficiency (EE) and grid services offering. Widespread deployment of the AEMS system will improve the EE and demand flexibility of the building commercial building stock. It should also support cities and states in meeting their climate change mitigation goals. This document describes the various EE and grid service features of the AEMS system, infrastructure and data required to implement those features, and how the features should be automated. It also details how the various features will be tested and validated, including field validation. The document also details what flexibility the users have and how they will be able to leverage those capabilities exercise those. The intent is to create an AEMS system that would support scalable deployment, requires minimal configuration, and is easy to maintain over its expected lifespan. The initial alpha release of AEMS system is planned for March 2023, and the beta release is planned for the summer of 2023. The final release is planned for March 2024. Section 2 of the report documents the relevant building types that AEMS is suitable for. Section 3 documents EE features that will be supported. It will also include the data requirements, hardware requirements, implementation details, and how EE features will be tested and validated. Grid service features will be documented in section 4, including data requirements, hardware requirements, implementation details, and how the services will be tested and validated. Planned next steps are described in section 5.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

An overview of data tools for representing and managing building information and performance data

Building information modeling (BIM) has been widely adopted for representing and exchanging building data across disciplines during building design and construction. However, BIM's use in the building operation phase is limited. With the increasing deployment of low-cost sensors and meters, as well as affordable digital storage and computing technologies, growing volumes of data have been collected from buildings, their energy services systems, and occupants. Such data are crucial to help decision makers understand what, how, and when energy is consumed in buildings—a critical step to improving building performance for energy efficiency, demand flexibility, and resilience. However, practical analyses and use of the collected data are very limited due to various reasons, including poor data quality, ad-hoc representation of data, and lack of data science skills. To unlock value from building data, there is a strong need for a toolchain to curate and represent building information and performance data in common standardized terminologies and schemas, to enable interoperability between tools and applications. This study selected and reviewed 24 data tools based on common use cases of data across the building life cycle, from design to construction, commissioning, operation, and retrofits. The selected data tools are grouped into three categories: (1) data dictionary or terminology, (2) data ontology and schemas, and (3) data platforms. The data are grouped into ten typologies covering most types of data collected in buildings. This study resulted in five main findings: (1) most data representation tools can represent their intended data typologies well, such as Green Button for smart meter data and Brick schema for metadata of sensors in buildings and HVAC systems, but none of the tools cover all ten types of data; (2) there is a need for data schemas to represent the basis of design data and metadata of occupant data; (3) standard terminologies such as those defined in BEDES are only adopted in a few data tools; (4) integrating data across various stages in the building life cycle remains a challenge; and (5) most data tools were developed and maintained by different parties for different purposes, their flexibility and interoperability can be improved to support broader use cases. Finally, recommendations for future research on building data tools are provided for the data and buildings community based on the FAIR principles to make data Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗