How Paris COP21 drives low-carbon building energy efficiency

by Katie Daniel | September 23, 2016 2:52 pm

HORIZONS
Paul Bertram, FCSI, CDT, CSC, LEED AP, GGP
At the 21^st Conference of the Parties (COP 21) in December 2015, countries taking part in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted the Paris Agreement. These nations, including the United States, will strive to keep the global temperature rise this century below 1.5 C (2.7 F). On Earth Day 2016—April 21—more than 155 countries respectively committed to this at the UN headquarters in New York City. With each country’s signing of the agreement, a proposal plan for actions, whether short- or long-term, had to be submitted.

During his Paris COP21 speech[1], President Barack Obama said, “the United States of America not only recognizes our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it.” He then committed to reduce emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels within a decade.

American Institute of Architects (AIA) president Elizabeth Chu Richter, FAIA, stated that when her board adopted a position statement [2]on resilience in 2014, it was a call to action for architects to address issues of climate adaptation in their practice. She says architects welcome the COP21 talks as a way to ensure the role buildings play in sustainability is forefront in the delegations’ minds.

CSI is a signatory supporting Ed Mazria’s Architecture 2030[3] initiative, which calls for all new buildings, developments, and major renovations to be carbon-neutral by 2030. The Alliance to Save Energy says doubling energy productivity[4] in the United States by that same year will save $327 billion annually in energy costs, add 1.3 million jobs, and reduce carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions by a third. The question is, how do those in the design/construction industry help make this happen?

This article is intended as a framework to consider strategic, tactical, and operational points of view regarding delivery of high-performance energy-efficient buildings. It is based on this author’s personal experiences as a delegate of the Paris COP21, and as a CSI member involved in the design/construction industry for more than a quarter-century.

Government and industry pushing for change
U.S. adoption of stringent building energy codes for new residential and commercial buildings—along with resources such as the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) Resource Center[5] and the Building Codes Assistance Project (BCAP)—has assisted in promoting adoption, implementation, and advancement of building energy codes on the state, local, and international levels. The DOE also has its Better Buildings initiative, which currently includes 310 partners representing 34,000 buildings who are set to achieve goals of at least 20 percent energy reduction within a decade. (These programs[6] from states and cities are worth noting for future business and case studies on what is working and what is not in energy intensity and related GHG reduction.)

The federal government has been mandated to lead by example[7]. The vision is to create a clean-energy economy that will increase national prosperity, promote energy security, combat climate change, protect the interests of taxpayers, and safeguard the health of the environment.

In 2006, General Services Administration (GSA) adopted the “Memorandum of Understanding for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings.” This year, it updated its “High Performance and Sustainable Buildings Guidance,” which includes guiding principles[8] for minimizing energy use in new construction and major renovations, along with existing buildings. Strategies include focus on reducing building energy loads—including products that are “life-cycle-cost-effective”—before considering renewable or clean and alternative energy sources.

The guiding principles are also influencing efforts throughout the country in exploring innovative ways to achieve progress toward carbon neutrality with advanced and stretch energy codes, incentive programs, and mandates. Forty-seven states have energy efficiency requirements for state-owned or funded public buildings that go beyond the state energy code and help reduce demand-side energy and related greenhouse gases (GHGs).

In June 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set state standards to reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants, a program known as the “Clean Power Plan[9].” Each state has a GHG reduction target and would be required to submit a plan—with energy efficiency strategies encouraged—to EPA for approval. However, the Supreme Court has ‘stayed’ the plan’s implementation pending judicial rule—27 states oppose the EPA program, while 18 support it. While this ‘stay’ is in place, many states are nonetheless quietly continuing development for their plans, as building energy efficiency is considered an opportunity that can help reduce demand-side energy.

The “Northeast and Mid-Atlantic Industrial Sector Report: Market Assessment & Recommended Strategies to Accelerate Energy Efficiency[10]” reports of the four major energy-consuming sectors of the United States economy, the industrial sector consumes the largest amount of energy, beating out transportation, along with residential and commercial buildings. It is accountable for approximately 31 percent of total energy use, or 30.5 quads in the Northeast alone.

More than 140 companies, including U.S. industrial manufacturers, have made an ongoing commitment to climate action; they represent significant CO₂ reductions through the American Businesses for Climate Action and Clean Energy (AB4CE). These are the world’s most influential businesses committed to doubling their energy productivity, which is about getting more economic output from each unit of energy.

U.S. corporations contracted for 3.1 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy in 2015—double the amount procured by corporate purchasers the previous year, based on the findings of a study released by the Advanced Energy Economy Institute (AEEI). According to Greenbiz.com[11], 431 companies already report stronger financial performance and a better ability to manage the changing landscape of natural resources supply, customer demand, and regulatory controls.

Almost 1900 companies publicly disclosed data to CDP (formerly Carbon Disclosure Project) last year, while 248 invested in projects to reduce climate-changing emissions outside of their immediate operations, purchasing the equivalent of 39.8 million tons of carbon dioxide.

The City Energy Project is a national initiative run by Institute for Market Transformation (IMT) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to improve the energy efficiency of buildings. The current leadership of 10 cities (from Atlanta and Denver to Los Angeles and Chicago) are providing practical solutions that cut energy waste, boost local economies, and reduce harmful pollution. These types of programs from states and cities are worth noting for future business and case studies on what is working (and what is not) in energy intensity and related GHG reduction.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN AMERICA

The 2014 American Center for Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) “International Energy Efficiency Scorecard” ranked the country 13 out of 16, behind China, Canada, and India. Last year, the United States moved up to eighth place[12], but there is room to improve, especially when it comes to energy productivity. The current edition of the Sustainable Energy in America Factbook, produced for the Business Council for Sustainable Energy by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, shows the ratio of gross domestic product (GDP) to energy consumed continues to grow, improving by 2.3 percent from 2014 to 2015, following a 1.1 percent increase the previous year. The U.S. economy has now grown by 10 percent since 2007, while primary energy consumption has fallen by 2.4 percent. Estimates put forward by ACEEE indicate as much as 60 percent of the energy intensity improvements seen since 1980 are due to efficiency gains. The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) calls for all new federal commercial buildings to be net-zero energy by 2030. Section 433 is a key component to federal buildings entering the planning process in 2020 or beyond to be designed to achieve zero-net-energy.

Benchmarking, disclosure, and performance-based codes
DOE defines benchmarking[13] as the practice of comparing the measured performance of a device, process, facility, or organization to itself, its peers, or established norms—the goal involves informing and motivating performance improvement. Thirty cities and states and 21 organizations from across the country are committing to take new actions to make it easier to identify ways to cut energy waste by making energy data available to building owners. This provides benchmarking information to determine what are the most cost-effective energy efficiency improvements for buildings.

Fifteen cities now have benchmarking and disclosure laws, which require building owners to report their buildings’ annual energy use to the local government. Several cities also adopted ‘stretch’ building energy codes, mandating new buildings to achieve higher energy efficiency goals going beyond base code. Benchmarking and disclosure is a basis for understanding where the best return on investment (ROI) is possible for energy efficiency improvements.

Performance-based codes also reduce energy intensity and related GHGs. In 2014, participants at the Performance Outcome Summit[14] in Seattle examined the opportunities, barriers, and next steps that will transition the commercial building industry from estimating energy use (based on models in the design phase) to measuring real performance outcomes (based on actual energy use in an occupied building).

The 2015 International Green Construction Code (IgCC) includes measures to improve energy efficiency of buildings. One of these, the Zero Energy Performance Index (zEPI), provides a scale for measuring commercial building energy performance. Critical to this effort is predictive (projected) energy modeling that requires an “experienced” practitioner. The modeling demands continuous updating with quality control, utilizing Appendix G of American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-rise Residential Buildings, including model calibration and use of energy models for measurement and verification. The predictive (projected) energy modeling is compared to one year of actual performance benchmarking/disclosure for making adjustments to deliver the clients energy productivity goals.

EMBODIED ENERGY

The term ‘embodied energy’ refers to the energy required to extract, manufacture, transport, install, and dispose of building materials. Efforts to reduce this energy use and associated emissions (e.g. through manufacturing energy intensity reductions) can be made as part of a larger effort to reduce emissions from buildings. Embodied energy is part of the life cycle assessment (LCA) used in whole-building LCA; it is reported by materials with an environmental product declaration (EPD) and may be specified consideration.

Building technologies and trends
Given these various initiatives, standards, requirements, and aspirations, how can buildings be better designed to meet energy efficiency goals? After site orientation, one of the most important steps in creating a high-performance, low-carbon building involves the right-sizing of energy conservation measures (EMCs) such as lighting, building controls, and equipment with renewables or green power purchasing offsets. However, there is also another important factor—envelope design.

This author participated in the Paris COP21 sidebar session, “A Key to Energizing Efficient, Productive, and Smart Cities and Grids.” The talk turned to deep energy retrofits, including exterior recladding. Other business and policy panelists discussed unlocking emissions reductions and increasing energy productivity through energy-efficient and smart technologies in our cities and electricity grids. The important message was how these solutions together will deliver:

• more efficient consumption of energy by the building;
• deeper penetration of renewable energy resources, such as wind and solar;
• wider deployment of ‘distributed’ energy resources, such as micro grids, rooftop solar, and other onsite power supplies; and
• storage to reduce GHGs.

Innovations and technologies to deliver energy efficiency are discussed in the paragraphs that follow.

Heat mapping
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) researchers have streamlined the process of heat mapping[15], allowing for scans of large groups of buildings, or even entire cities. The process uses a vehicle with automated cameras that take thermal infrared images of every building as it moves along—similar to the way Google Street View cars obtain visual imagery. Thermal imaging of more than 17,000 buildings in MIT’s Cambridge were scanned using an imaging rig. Heat mapping offers utilities a scalable and cost-effective means to gather superior intelligence around the building stock across the entire territory.

Drones and FLIR thermal imaging
The ASTM task group on façade inspections introduced E3036[16], Guide for Notating Façade Conditions in the Field, and the proposed WK52572, Guide for Visual Inspection of Building Facades Using Drones, to better building façade inspections.

Lasers in design and construction
Laser technology permits high-precision 3D measurement, imaging, and comparison of parts and compound structures within production and quality assurance processes. The devices are used for inspecting components and assemblies, production planning, documenting large volume spaces or structures in 3D, and improving efficiencies and processes.

RESILIENT BUILDING CODES

At the time of this article’s writing, there have been eight weather and climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion[17] each across the United States this year. These events included two floods and six severe storms. A number of green building programs have already incorporated Resilience into their credit areas. In May 2016, the White House and the National Institute of Building Sciences convened the Conference on Resilient Building Codes to bring increased attention to the important role of codes and standards in achieving a resilient nation. Building performance in extreme weather conditions is critical in this discussion.

Offsite construction
In an interview with Construction Dive[18], construction/real-estate firm, Mortenson president, Dan Johnson, said offsite construction technology is making it possible to do offsite assemblies and prefabrication. “If you look at what we believe to be the jobsite of the future, [it is] probably a lot more about assembling components that have been prefabricated in other locations, assembled in other locations, and delivered to the jobsite,” he explained. (The National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) Offsite Construction Council [OSCC] [19]is a good reference on this topic.) With Associated General Contractors (AGC) reporting firms are struggling to find qualified skilled workers to hire, the centralization advantages of offsite and modular construction could be cause for its rise.

District energy and net-zero energy districts
Energy districts are campus-like multiple buildings served by a central plant. The Rocky Mountain Institute’s (RMI’s) “An Integrated Business Model for Net-zero Energy Districts[20]” is a business model for developing net-zero or ultra-low energy districts in a way that is attractive to the district developer, parcel developer, and tenants. The goal is to create a profitable business for an integrated energy services provider, while benefitting the local electric grid and neighboring community.

Deep energy retrofits
When it comes to existing buildings, the goal is to identify scalable, repeatable clean-energy, low-carbon solutions through modeling, measurement, and verification. One such example is the recladding of Boston’s Castle Square Apartments[21]—a building that had its non-insulated brick façade transformed by super-insulated, offsite-constructed insulated metal panels (IMPs). The largest deep energy retrofit ever undertaken in the country, Castle Square’s predictive modeling demonstrated energy reduction by 72 percent with the super-insulated re-clad envelope system envelope representing more than 30 percent of the total. One year of post-project performance reported that performance outcome was 52 percent over baseline. Modeling errors and lack of commissioning at the beginning proved to be the difference. Although not part of this particular project, ASTM E2813-12e1, Standard Practice for Building Enclosure Commissioning, would have been appropriate to specify to ensure enclosure performance.

Deep energy retrofits that include the envelope are a challenge because of longer payback and upfront investment. Life cycle costing versus first costs must be projected with ROI and net present value (NPV) for a sound business case.

Finding funding
Online at www.dsireusa.org[22], the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE) is the most comprehensive source of information on incentives and policies supporting renewables and energy efficiency in the United States. The MIT/IMT report, “Local Governments’ Role in Energy Project Financing: A Guide to Financing Tools for the Commercial Real Estate Sector[23],” by Brendan McEwen and John Miller, also identifies several energy project financing tools that can support energy upgrades in commercial buildings. They included:

• Energy Performance Contracting (EPCs) With Building-Owner Borrowing;
• Energy Service Agreements (ESAs);
• Managed Energy Service Agreements (MESAs);
• Metered Energy Efficiency: Transaction Structure (MEETS); and
• Energy Efficiency Investment Corporation (EEIC)—this last tool is exemplified by the New York City Energy Efficiency Corporation’s (NYCEEC’s) energy efficiency loan program.

Funding mechanisms were part of the discussion at the Paris COP 21—’green bonds’ were identified by many in the investment community as a possible instrument for financing the transition to a low-carbon economy. The issuer of a green bond pledges to spend the money raised on projects with environmental benefits. The ‘green’ concept generates more investor interest and makes environmentally friendly projects easier for investors to find and support.

The green bond market is growing rapidly, with about $3 billion issued in 2012 and $41.8 billion issued last year. The call is high among investors, but there are not enough green bonds to satisfy this demand.

Twenty-five states are currently implementing energy efficiency resource standards (EERS)[24] policies requiring electricity savings. Of these, seven require utilities or third-party administrators achieve cost-effective energy efficiency. EERS programs can be used to fund building energy efficiency upgrades.

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)[25] is the country’s first mandatory market-based program to reduce GHG emissions. A cooperative effort among the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont to cap and reduce CO₂ emissions from the power sector, RGGI involves states selling nearly all emission allowances through auctions and then investing proceeds in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other consumer benefit programs.

Conclusion
CSI and building team members might want to be aware of these initiatives, technologies, and trends influencing requirements for high-performance, energy-efficient buildings for a low-carbon world. The role of each team member may vary from that of strategic planning to tactical solutions to operational outcomes. Integrated design strategies should be considered in order to have as much knowledge at the beginning to make more informed decisions to deliver the design intent. Specifiers write the project design intent, and contractors coordinate the construction documents and deliver it. The opportunity to be better informed provides useful knowledge to ensure building construction and operations that help the United States meet its commitments to COP21, Architecture 2030, and itself.

Paul Bertram, FCSI, CDT, CSC, LEED AP, GGP, is the director of environment and sustainability for Kingspan Insulated Panels North America and a past-president of CSI. He represents the company on various U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), ASTM, International Code Council (ICC), and National Institute of Building Science (NIBS) groups. Bertram’s current work includes government affairs where he drives advocacy for resilient and reliable building energy efficiency and related greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions on demand-side energy. He serves on the board of directors for the Business Council of Sustainable Energy and was part of its delegation at the 21^st Conference of the Parties (COP21) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In 2016, he was named to the board of the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) as an Industry Member. He can be contacted via e-mail at paul.bertram@kingspan.com[26].

Source URL: https://www.constructionspecifier.com/how-paris-cop21-drives-low-carbon-building-energy-efficiency/

---