Energy Impact of Residential Ventilation Norms in the UnitedStates

Abstract

SUMMARYThe first and only national norm for residential ventilation in the United States is Standard 62.2-2004 published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Airconditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). This standard does not by itself have the force of regulation, but is being considered for adoption by various jurisdictions within the U.S. as well as by various voluntary programs. The adoption of 62.2 would require mechanical ventilation systems to be installed in virtually all new homes, but allows for a wide variety of design solutions. These solutions, however, may have a different energy costs and nonenergy benefits. This report uses a detailed simulation model to evaluate the energy impacts of currently popular and proposed mechanical ventilation approaches that are 62.2 compliant for a variety of climates. These results separate the energy needed to ventilate from the energy needed to condition the ventilation air, from the energy needed to distribute and/or temper the ventilation air. The results show that exhaust systems are generally the most energy efficient method of meeting the proposed requirements. Balanced and supply systems have more ventilation resulting in greater energy and their associated distribution energy use can be significant.

Energy Impacts of Envelope Tightening and Mechanical Ventilation for the U.S. Residential Sector

“…We added the required amount of mechanical ventilation to the housing stock using either an exhaust fan or an HRV. 4. IECC: Tighten all homes to achieve the standards specified in the 2012 IECC standard while complying with ASHRAE 62.2 In this scenario, the envelope airtightness of each home was set to the level recommended by the 2012 IECC standard [22]: 5 air changes per hour at an induced 50 Pascal indoor-outdoor pressure difference (ACH50) for IECC climate zones CZ1 and CZ2; 3 ACH50 for all other climate zones.…”

“…In recent years there has been a proliferation of federal, state and local residential retrofit programs that incorporate air sealing as a central measure to reduce energy use and associated carbon emissions. Estimates of the energy savings of air sealing and energy costs of mechanical ventilation are often based on extrapolations from simulations [3][4][5] or comparisons of preand post-retrofit energy bills of homes [6][7]. Matson and Sherman conducted the only previous nationwide United States modeling effort to estimate the total energy impact of infiltration and the variability in the impact [8].…”

Effect of Ventilation Strategies on Residential Ozone Levels

“…Procedures. The air flow rates in this study were calculated using a ventilation, heat transfer and Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment simulation tool called REGCAP that has been used in several previous studies of envelope air flows and their interactions with HVAC systems [9,10,11]. REGCAP was particularly suited to use in this study because it separates the air flow in and out of the house into specific leakage sites to which we can assign the different ozone penetration factors and thus evaluate the effect of using different air flow paths for outdoor ozone entry depending on the ventilation system used.…”

Development of a Residential Integrated Ventilation Controller

“…The RIVEC algorithm was integrated into the REGCAP simulation tool used in previous studies for the Energy Commission (Walker and Sherman (2006) and Sherman and Walker (2008)). This tool performs minute-by-minute ventilation, heat and moisture calculations that allow for the dynamic performance of buildings and HVAC components in both the house and the attic (where the HVAC equipment was located in the field test house and in all the simulations).…”