SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “building energy code compliance”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2021

Best practices for building energy codes compliance

Building energy codes are a proven policy mechanism to achieve economy-wide energy savings in buildings. In 2021, the International Energy Agency Energy in Buildings and Communities Programme (IEA EBC) Building Energy Codes Working Group (BECWG) set out to survey the diverse codes compliance practices across BECWG member countries. While codes vary in format and approach, attaining the energy reduction potential of building energy codes requires effective implementation and compliance. This is a large undertaking for countries, as effective compliance checking requires adequate resources, technical knowledge, capacity, and strong institutions. Many nations face the same compliance issues, such as requiring faster and easier methods to verify codes and coordinating among numerous stakeholders and levels of government. This paper explores the need for stronger institutional approaches to enforce building energy codes that will lead to code compliance. Specifically, this report sets out to address the question of what practices result in effective building energy code compliance in selected BECWG member countries.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

A Review of the Evaluation of Building Energy Code Compliance in the United States

Building energy codes are essential tools for achieving energy efficiency in buildings. However, the full energy savings potential of these codes can only be realized if buildings are constructed in compliance with them. Therefore, evaluating building energy code compliance is crucial in bridging the gap between the energy efficiency requirements set by energy codes and the actualized energy savings achieved. An energy code compliance evaluation serves as a mechanism to assess construction practices, evaluate the effectiveness of code enforcement, identify gaps in compliance, and guide strategies for improvement through training and education. Conducting code compliance evaluation activities involves field studies that require careful design and significant resources. Historically, more emphasis has been placed on developing and adopting building energy codes, while efforts to evaluate compliance have been relatively limited and lacking consistent approaches. The passage of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which mandated that states create plans for achieving 90% compliance within eight years, stimulated the need for an energy code compliance evaluation. As a result, federal, state, and local governments, and utilities have invested in the development of methodologies and tools for code compliance evaluation studies. This paper reviews the code compliance evaluation studies conducted in the United States over the past three decades. It describes and compares the methodologies and metrics used to assess building energy code compliance, summarizes the general elements and steps involved in the evaluation process, and discusses common issues in these studies. Over time, code compliance evaluation methodologies have evolved from isolated development within individual states, regions, and utilities, to widely accepted protocols applicable across different states and local jurisdictions. There has been a transition in compliance metrics, shifting from historical compliance rates to energy-consumption-oriented approaches.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Evaluating Building Energy Code Compliance and Savings Potential through Large-Scale Simulation with Models Inferred by Field Data

Building energy code compliance is the crucial link between the actual energy savings and the efficiency prescribed in energy codes. A research project aiming to identify opportunities to reduce energy consumption in new single-family residential construction by increasing compliance with the building energy code was conducted in several states of the United States. The study was comprised of three phases: (1) a baseline study to document typical practice and identify opportunities for improvement based on empirical data gathered from the field; (2) an education and training phase targeting the opportunities identified; and (3) a post-study to assess whether a reduction in average state-wide energy use could be achieved following the education and training phase. We proposed a novel methodology based on large-scale building energy simulation inferred by limited field data to assess the performance of a large population of homes. This paper presents the methodology, findings, and results of this study. The state-wide average energy consumption decreased at Phase III from Phase I for five of the seven states involved in the analysis. The measure-level savings potential analysis shows an overall reduction. Overall, the training and education phase plays a recognizable role in improving compliance with building energy codes.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

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 OSTI2025

Market Driven Residential Energy Codes: Comparing Performance in a Changing Technological Environment

The research project is undertaken to better understand the changing relationship between the two basic methods of building energy code compliance – prescriptive and performance – and how those methods relate to each other with respect to advancements in building energy computer simulation standards and capabilities. The International Energy Efficiency Code (IECC) is a model code adopted by many jurisdictions across the United States. Historically, the prescriptive compliance methodology has been preferred in most jurisdictions. The prescriptive methodology requires meeting or exceeding specific efficiency minimums for each envelope component. This tends to be a simple method to teach and verify. A more involved prescriptive alternative called the Total UA alternative is sometimes used. This method requires some multiplication, summing, and comparison to compute, so it is done with a fairly simple computer program. However, advances in computer and building energy simulation technology have resulted in increased use of more detailed performance compliance methods. The performance compliance method establishes the annual energy cost threshold via hourly simulation models. The compliance threshold is determined with a comparison building model simulation with geometry similar to the proposed home and with energy feature parameters and efficiencies as specified in the IECC. This project examines relationships between the two methods of building energy code compliance, including: • Overall annual energy use based on utility bill analysis by compliance method • Code official work processes with respect to compliance methods • Gaps and issues associated with building code compliance methods • Simulated energy use difference between compliance methods • Code compliance cost as a function of compliance method • Code compliance labeling effectiveness for high performance residences • Getting to net zero energy use and net zero greenhouse gas emissions through high performance code alternatives • Electronic code permitting and compliance alternatives

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Data Analysis of Energy Code Compliance in Commercial Buildings

What percent of newly constructed commercial buildings comply with the energy code? How much energy and cost could be saved if the compliance increased? Which code requirements have both low compliance rates and high savings potential? These are the questions U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is trying to answer through its Commercial Energy Code Field Study. Previous commercial studies have been very limited and did not result in a widely accepted and tested methodology. DOE’s goal is to create a standardized methodology that can produce actionable results at a reasonable study cost, that can be used by state and local governments and utilities and provides valuable information to policy makers. The field study team implemented the pilot methodology, compiling a data set of 230 office and retail buildings in two climate zones. The approach is based on identifying lost savings on a total energy cost basis rather than simply counting the quantity of measures that do not meet code. This report is focused on the analysis of the collected data. The primary goal was to analyze the data collected during the field study and determine the actual energy cost impact of each measure in a non-compliance situation. The energy impact results allowed for ranking the measures to identify which have the highest potential for lost savings. These results combined with the time required to verify each measure will allow future compliance verification to focus on measures that had a large impact on energy use over the life of the building and those that have the greatest savings recovery potential per verification hour.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Methodology to Establish Performance Targets for Building Energy Codes

This report explains the underlying development of the U.S. NZE building sector performance targets reported in Federal Register Notice XX. This document also includes NZE performance targets for U.S. states, which were developed following the same procedures used to develop the national values. These national and state targets are intended to support the establishment and attainment of NZE goals over time. Where residential and commercial building energy code compliance mechanisms apply to new buildings and major renovations and dictate performance requirements, these targets reflect the recommended, minimum levels of performance. Appendix A provides the performance values and targets by U.S. state for residential and commercial buildings. These include each state’s adopted energy code performance, current published MEC performance value, and a nominal NZE code compliance performance target. The current code and NZE values can be compared to the state adopted code value to indicate the level of advancement needed to move towards recommended NZE building performance levels. Additional supplemental resources are available to support states and local governments ready to move from setting NZE policy goals to adopting NZE codes. More information about these resources and the actions states can take to achieve NZE buildings with energy codes are provided in the body of this document.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2023

Data Analysis of Energy Code Compliance in Commercial Buildings (Rev. 1)

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Accuracy of HVAC Load Predictions: Validation of EnergyPlus and DOE-2 using FLEXLAB Measurements

The aim of the project reported here was to better understand the level of accuracy of three building energy simulation (BES) engines (‘engines’) — EnergyPlus™, DOE-2.1e, and DOE-2.2 — by identifying and investigating significant deviations between the performance predicted by these engines and actual performance as measured in the FLEXLAB® test facility at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). The specific test conditions included some of those prescribed in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140 - Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs. Detailed measurements of FLEXLAB performance, including indoor temperatures and heat fluxes and air-flow and water flow rates and temperatures in the Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system, together with hourly weather data, were recorded and used in analyzing the simulation results from EnergyPlus v8.8, DOE-2.2 v3.65 and DOE-2.1e v127. These engines are commonly used in the United States for building energy code compliance, federal, state, and utility incentives programs, as well as energy efficient design of new buildings and energy retrofit of existing buildings. Seven conventional overhead mixing ventilation scenarios were tested and each engine was found to have a similar level of agreement with the measurements of space-level heating and sensible cooling loads. These results provide useful information regarding the accuracy of these engines in predicting the cooling and heating load elements of whole building energy performance. This information is intended for practitioners who are concerned about transitioning between simulation tools with different engines and for managers of utility programs leveraging these tools for evaluating and/or projecting measure savings to be incentivized under their programs. The results of the comparisons of simulated and measured performance indicate that the predictions from all three engines are not significantly different. The 24-hour average value of the absolute mean bias indicates the likely magnitude of the error in any particular case. The average mean bias is reduced by cancelation of overprediction in one case by underprediction in another. The daytime absolute mean biases, which may be more important for both energy performance and occupant comfort, are ~6%, presumably because of the greater complexity involved in simulating in the presence of solar radiation. EnergyPlus typically overpredicts the cooling load and/or underpredicts the heating load by ~1.5% and the DOE-2 engines typically underpredict the cooling load by approximately the same amount. The Root Mean Square Error is relatively more sensitive to shorter term variations in the difference between predicted and measured loads; the three engines have similar values, ~10%, suggesting that the uncertainties in their predictions of peak loads may also be similar in magnitude. The implication of these results is that users, both designers and program analysts, can use EnergyPlus, DOE-2.1e, or DOE-2.2 to model conventional commercial buildings equipped with overhead mixing ventilation with a similar level of confidence. Further work is required to better understand the variability in the level of agreement between the engine predictions and FLEXLAB measurements, where a particular engine will agree well with FLEXLAB in some cases and not so well in others and another engine will agree or disagree in different cases. As the sources of this variability are identified and eliminated or reduced significantly, it is recommended that the experimental capabilities and methods developed in the study reported here should be applied to validating heating and cooling load calculations for spaces with different types of furniture and miscellaneous loads. These methods should then be applied to low energy space conditioning systems in EnergyPlus including, in particular, radiant slab and radiant ceiling panel cooling and heating systems and ‘mixed mode’ systems that combine mechanical cooling and natural ventilation systems, focusing on controls, including control of thermal mass. The work reported here addresses the conventional method of heating and cooling occupied spaces; other methods, such as the use of radiant heating and cooling systems have the potential to provide equivalent occupant comfort, or better, with lower energy consumption. These systems are addressed more explicitly in EnergyPlus but there is a need for empirical validation to give users the same level of confidence in modeling these systems that they have, or should have, in modeling conventional systems, based on the results presented here.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2024

An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest (Final Technical Report)

The primary goal of the “An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest” project was to improve housing through strengthened building energy code implementation in two states, Colorado and Nevada, leading to greater energy and utility bill savings for households. Colorado is a home rule state. Nevada adopts a statewide code, but cities and counties must also adopt the code, making the state function like a home rule state. To broaden the impact of the project, an additional goal was to share and amplify project experiences, findings, and lessons that can be applied in other states. To achieve these goals, the project’s key objectives were to examine how residential energy codes are implemented in partner states; to use these findings to strengthen codes implementation through enhanced education, training, and outreach; and to enhance energy code technical assistance capabilities in the two partner states. In both partner states, the project led to the creation of a quantitative baseline understanding of compliance with high-impact energy code requirements, such as foundation, wall, and ceiling R-value; window U-factor and SHGC; envelope air tightness; duct tightness; and high-efficiency lighting. It then applied this baseline information to directly inform training in geographic areas with high levels of building and construction activity. The project has placed Colorado and Nevada among 23 states across the country that have conducted a single-family residential field study based on the established U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) methodology since 2014. It has also helped each State Energy Office test models for partnership- and relationship-building among government agencies and key stakeholder groups, including the State Energy Office and relevant code administration and professional licensing agencies, building officials, designers, builders, trades and utilities. At the national level, the project helped educate and inform State and Territory Energy Offices on a replicable methodology to assess energy code construction practices, effective stakeholder engagement strategies, and tailored energy code education and training. These findings are particularly pertinent for home-rule states, such as Colorado and Nevada, which rely on local government awareness and action to advance and implement building energy codes. By raising awareness of code adoption and compliance, this project has helped to equip each partner state with data on code compliance, strategies, education, and partnership models to advance building energy codes. This in turn will have an important impact on new construction practices in Colorado and Nevada, leading to more energy efficient and affordable housing. Currently, more than 62 percent of Colorado’s population lives in one of the 55 jurisdictions that have adopted the 2021 IECC to date, while nearly 95 percent of the state's population lives in one of the 208 jurisdictions that have adopted a code at 2015 IECC levels or higher. In Nevada, the 2018 IECC was adopted by the Governor’s Office of Energy in July 2018. By July 2020, 47 percent of the adopted energy code in the state was 2018 IECC which covers 96.5 percent of Nevada’s population. The training materials funded by this project focus on the 2021 IECC and will continue to be relevant in the two states as additional jurisdictions update their building energy codes.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2021

Commercial Building Energy Code Field Study: Data Collection Methodology and Protocol

In support of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Commercial Buildings Energy Code Field Study, this data collection methodology and protocol provides guidance on all aspects of undertaking a compliance study, from development of a sampling plan to recruitment to code requirements and compliance checks for each energy code measure specified to be collected. The protocol also includes a data collection form that captures all key information needed for analysis of commercial energy code compliance. This methodology was developed by the Institute for Market Transformation in coordination with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and the U.S. Department of Energy Building Energy Codes Program with the objective of assisting states, jurisdictions, utilities and others as they seek to measure and demonstrate compliance rates with energy codes in commercial buildings, as well as to target areas for improvement through increased energy code compliance and broader energy-efficiency programs. It is also intended to facilitate a consistent and replicable approach to research studies of this type and establish a transparent data set representing baseline construction practices across the U.S.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2023

Commercial Building Energy Code Field Study: Data Collection Methodology and Protocol

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Commercial Energy Code Compliance – Just the Facts, Ma’am

What percent of newly constructed commercial buildings comply with the energy code? How much energy and cost could be saved if the compliance increased? Which code requirements have both low compliance rates and high savings potential? These are the questions U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is trying to answer through its Commercial Energy Code Field Study. Previous commercial studies have been very limited and did not result in a widely accepted and tested methodology. DOE’s goal is to create a standardized methodology that can produce actionable results at a reasonable study cost, that can be used by state and local governments and utilities and provides valuable information to policy makers. This paper builds on the methodology presented at the 2016 Summer Study and provides a first glimpse of the results as seen in the field. The field study team has implemented the pilot methodology, compiling a data set of over 200 office and retail buildings in climate zones 2A and 5A. The approach is based on identifying lost savings on a total energy cost basis rather than simply counting the quantity of measures that do not meet code. This paper will review the findings of that analysis, discuss critical aspects of the methodology, such as sampling and recruitment strategies, and identify areas where the greatest return—bang for the buck—exists in improving compliance with codes in commercial buildings. In addition, the team will make specific recommendations for jurisdictions looking to use the methodology to maximize energy code savings achieved in the field.

Cheslak, Kimberly↗

DOE OSTI2025

Building Performance Standards and Energy Code Alignment - Technical Brief

Building energy codes focus on building design, construction and renovation and have significantly increased building efficiency since the first national energy code was published in 1975. Most jurisdictions have energy codes based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (hereto referred to as Standard 90.1) and the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). Compliance options available in these model energy codes include a prescriptive path, whole building performance paths – including IECC Total Building Performance (TBP), Standard 90.1 Energy Cost Budget (ECB) method and Performance Rating Method (PRM) – and system performance paths for envelope and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems. Building performance standard (BPS) policies are an emerging policy tool used by jurisdictions to reduce the operational energy use or greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the existing commercial building stock. BPS policies vary widely between jurisdictions and are tailored to each location’s climate and energy goals. Intuitively, projects that met a recent edition of the energy code should comply with the BPS targets. However, some new buildings may struggle with meeting the BPS for the following reasons: 1. Energy codes focus on the design of the building and its projected ability to perform efficiently, while BPS compliance is dependent on the actual ongoing performance of the building, considering variables like occupancy, operation, and maintenance. 2. There are significant differences in the methodologies used to determine BPS compliance versus code compliance, including how each handles compliance metrics, handling of building amenities, and renewable energy generation. 3. The prescriptive compliance path in the energy code is based on performance of individual building components, as opposed to the performance compliance path which accounts for holistic building design strategies and interdependent building systems. This can result in a significant variability in post-occupancy performance for buildings built using the prescriptive path. Designs on the lower end of the permitted efficiency range may struggle with meeting the BPS.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2023

Modular Multi-family Construction: A Field Study of Energy Code Compliance and Performance through Offsite Prefabrication

Prefabrication in a controlled, factory setting may improve the energy code compliance and energy performance of modular buildings compared to traditional site-built buildings. To test this premise, the work detailed in this DOE-funded commercial field study (EE0009082) compares the energy code compliance of 25 modular and 30 site-built multifamily buildings under construction in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia and Seattle representing climate zones 3B, 3C, 4A and 4C respectively. This dataset includes full data on 20 modular and site-built buildings and partial data on 35 modular and site-built buildings that had started prior to or were completed after the 18-month data collection period. This study also compares the post-occupancy energy performance or energy use intensity (EUI) of an additional 23 modular multifamily buildings and 128 site-built multifamily buildings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2023

EUI Benchmarks for Net-Zero Energy Buildings in India

In our study we present EUI benchmarks for NZEBs for six building types across residential and non-residential typologies and for India's five climate zones. This approach is similar to the simulation-based benchmarks used by the B3 program in Minnesota, the Cal-Arch methodology in California, and the US Solar Decathlon approach, which combine simulations with actual building data. Of the six building types we explore one in detail with a range of operation scenarios, specifically narrowing down the EUI benchmarks for mixed-mode building operation and for variable temperature set-points as prescribed in the National Building Code of India.The contribution of this work is to provide rigorous end-use level EUI benchmarks for six building types, and to describe a method for simulation-based EUI benchmarks for mixed-mode operation with variable setpoints to highlight the difference between the standard approach used for the five building types and the On-Site Construction Worker Housing which additionally has the mixed-mode variable setpoint approach.On-Site Construction Worker Housings are typically poorly constructed temporary structures, without adequate thermal comfort, It is critical to provide adequate thermal comfort to protect people from the warming effects of climate change, and to discover super efficient and cost-effective ways to do so.The methodology used for the On-Site Construction Worker Housing (CWH) results in an 80% acceptability according to the India Model for Adaptive Comfort in the National Building Code of India. EUIs of all six buildings are 60% lower than the minimum compliance with India's Energy Conservation Building Codes, providing benchmarks for efficiency levels. The end-use level EUI benchmarks are now provided to over 1800 Solar Decathlon India participants so that they can compare the performance of their NZEB designs.In particular, the CWH results provide an insight into the importance of the mixed-mode operation with variable temperature set-points. The results from the simulation study show that for an NZEB target, the EUI with standard thermal comfort model and without mixed operation is 58.26 kWh/m2*year, while that with the variable set-points of the adaptive model with mixed mode operation is 24.23 kWh/m2*year. This is a 58% reduction in EUI. Given that many building types including residential, and non-residential operate in mixed mode, it is important to take this work further to develop mixed-mode operation NZEB benchmarks so that the carbon intensity of these buildings could be lower than the standard thermal comfort model approach.

benchmarking↗

DOE OSTI2024

A new database of building-space-specific internal loads and load schedules for performance based code compliance modeling of commercial buildings

Building-level loads and load profiles prescribed by current modeling rules save modelers time and avoid gaming during whole building performance modeling. However, recent studies show that they sometimes insufficiently capture the entire building performance due to the varied loads and load profiles for different space types. As a solution to this issue, this paper develops a database of building-space-specific loads and load profiles used in code compliance modeling. The existing sets of loads and load profiles are reviewed and the challenges behind using them for specific research topics are discussed. Then, the proposed method to develop the building-space-specific loads and load profiles is introduced. After that, the database for these building-space-specific loads and load profiles is presented. In addition, one case is studied to demonstrate the applications of these loads and load profiles. In this case study, three methods are used to develop building energy models: space-specific (using knowledge of the distribution and location of space types and applying the space-specific data in the developed database), building-level (assuming a lack of knowledge of the space types and using the building-level data in the developed database), and calculated-ratio (assuming knowledge of the distribution of space types but not their locations and calculating weighted average values based on the space-specific data in the developed database). Finally, the energy results simulated by using these three methods are compared, which show building-level methods can produce energy results up to 20% different than the space-specific methods. Finally, this paper discusses the application scope and maintenance of this new database.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2024

Commercial Zero Code Plug-In: Zero Energy and Operational Emissions Overlay for Model Energy Codes (Technical Brief)

Model energy codes (MEC) describe requirements needed to demonstrate building energy performance compliance. They can be readily adopted by states and local jurisdictions to support desirable energy efficiency investment in new buildings and major renovations. This report provides commercial building energy code language as an overlay to current MEC, which is recognized by the U.S. DOE as ASHRAE Standard 90.1 2022. The code language provides a performance-based compliance path for achieving net zero energy or net zero operational energy emissions buildings with MEC. The path requires meeting two compliance metric target values: 1) a required minimum level of efficiency and 2) a measure of zero energy or emissions. The supporting documentation illustrates the magnitude of needed efficiency improvement and the additional offsets to be achieved from renewable energy sources.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗