Lessons Learned from Case Studies of Six High-Performance Buildings

Torcellini, P.; Pless, Shanti; Deru, M.; Griffith, Brent; Long, Nicholas; Judkoff, R.

doi:10.2172/884978

Cited by 99 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a need for design stage calculation methodologies to address all aspects of building energy consumption for wholebuilding simulation, including regulated and unregulated uses and predictions of actual operation (Norford et al, 1994;Diamond et al, 2006;Torcellini et al, 2006;Turner and Frankel, 2008). Building energy simulation models need to closely represent the actual behavior of the building under study for them to be used with any degree of confidence (Coakley et al, 2011).…”

Section: Importance Of Reducing the Gapmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of the Regulatory Energy Performance Gap and Its Underlying Causes in Non-domestic Buildings

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the discrepancy between predicted and measured energy use in non-domestic buildings in a UK context with outlook to global studies. It explains differences between energy performance quantification and classifies this energy performance gap as a difference between compliance and performance modeling with measured energy use. Literary sources are reviewed in order to signify the magnitude between predicted and measured energy use, which is found to deviate by +34% with a SD of 55% based on 62 buildings. It proceeds in describing the underlying causes for the performance gap, existent in all stages of the building life cycle, and identifies the dominant factors to be related to specification uncertainty in modeling, occupant behavior, and poor operational practices having an estimated effect of 20-60, 10-80, and 15-80% on energy use, respectively. Other factors that have a high impact are related to establishing the energy performance target, such as early design decisions, heuristic uncertainty in modeling, and occupant behavior. Finally, action measures and feedback processes in order to reduce the performance gap are discussed, indicating the need for energy in-use legislation, insight into design stage models, accessible energy data, and expansion of research efforts toward building performance in-use in relation to predicted performance. Keywords: energy performance gap, energy use in buildings, predictions, measurements, feedback, postoccupancy evaluation HiGHLiGHTS 1. Classifies the performance gap and analyses its magnitude and underlying causes. 2. The regulatory energy gap is found to deviate by +34% with a SD of 55% based on 62 case study buildings. 3. Specification uncertainty, occupant behavior, and poor practice are dominant underlying causes with an estimated effect of 20-60, 10-80, and 15-80% on energy use, respectively. 4. Action measures to reduce the energy performance gap in contrast to the building life cycle are discussed. 5. There is a need to develop techniques to mitigate the magnitude and underlying causes of the performance gap.

show abstract

Section: Importance Of Reducing the Gapmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of the Regulatory Energy Performance Gap and Its Underlying Causes in Non-domestic Buildings

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the next section we review the published work on post-occupancy performance of green buildings in terms of energy use. Torcellini et al [2004] conducted an overview of six sustainable buildings in the USA. Extensive monitoring of energy flows, including lighting loads, HVAC loads and plug loads, for a minimum of one year was undertaken.…”

Section: Renewable Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

Do LEED-certified buildings save energy? Yes, but…

Newsham

Mancini

Birt

2009

Energy and Buildings

519

240

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

/npsi/ctrl?lang=en http://nparc.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/npsi/ctrl?lang=fr Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at http://nparc.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/npsi/jsp/nparc_cp.jsp?lang=en NRC Publications Archive Archives des publications du CNRCThis publication could be one of several versions: author's original, accepted manuscript or the publisher's version. / La version de cette publication peut être l'une des suivantes : la version prépublication de l'auteur, la version acceptée du manuscrit ou la version de l'éditeur. For the publisher's version, please access the DOI link below./ Pour consulter la version de l'éditeur, utilisez le lien DOI ci-dessous.http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.enbuild.2009.03.014 Energy and Buildings, 41, 8, pp. 897-905, 2009-08-01 Do LEED-certified buildings save energy? Yes, but... Newsham, G. R.; Mancini, S.; Birt, B. AbstractWe conducted a re-analysis of data supplied by the New Buildings Institute and the US Green Buildings Council on measured energy use data from 100 LEED certified commercial and institutional buildings. These data were compared to the energy use of the general US commercial building stock. We also examined energy use by LEED certification level, and by energy-related credits achieved in the certification process. On average, LEED buildings used 18-39% less energy per floor area than their conventional counterparts. However, 28-35% of LEED buildings used more energy than their conventional counterparts. Further, the measured energy performance of LEED buildings had little correlation with certification level of the building, or the number of energy credits achieved by the building at design time. Therefore, at a societal level, green buildings can contribute substantial energy savings, but further work needs to be done to define green building rating schemes to ensure more consistent success at the individual building level. Note, these findings should be considered as preliminary, and the analyses should be repeated when longer data histories from a larger sample of green buildings are available.

show abstract

“…These data indicate the major impact of HPBs on the building industry. Many certified HPBs have already been occupied for a number of years, offering researchers the opportunity to evaluate the buildings' actual performance rather than the simulated results on which ratings and certifications are based [10,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19]. In 2008, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) conducted a postoccupancy evaluation to determine the actual performance of their green buildings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, multiple studies report gaps between designed and actual energy consumption in HPBs, including a 2004 report by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory [17], 2006 research by Diamond [18], and 2012 research by the University of California, Santa Barbara [22]. These prior studies indicate that actual energy consumption is the most meaningful metric for evaluating the performance of HPBs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An insight into actual energy use and its drivers in high-performance buildings

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using portfolio analysis and individual detailed case studies, we studied the energy performance and drivers of energy use in 51 high-performance office buildings in the U.S., Europe, China, and other parts of Asia. Portfolio analyses revealed that actual site energy use intensity (EUI) of the study buildings varied by a factor of as much indicates that a building is energy efficient and suggesting that improvement in the design and operation of HPBs is needed to realize their energy-saving potential. We studied the influence of climate, building size, and building technologies on building energy performance and found that although all are important, none are decisive factors in building energy use. EUIs were widely scattered in all climate zones. There was a trend toward low energy use in small buildings, but the correlation was not absolute; some small HPBs exhibited high energy use, and some large HPBs exhibited low energy use. We were unable to identify a set of efficient technologies that correlated directly to low EUIs. In two case studies, we investigated the influence of occupant behavior as well as operation and maintenance on energy performance and found that both play significant roles in realizing energy savings. We conclude that no single factor determines the actual energy performance of HPBs, and adding multiple efficient technologies does not necessarily improve building energy performance; therefore, an integrated design approach that takes account of climate, technology, occupant behavior, and operations and maintenance practices should be implemented to maximize energy savings in HPBs. These findings are intended to help architects, engineers, operators, and policy makers improve the design and operation of HPBs.

show abstract

Lessons Learned from Case Studies of Six High-Performance Buildings

Cited by 99 publications

References 20 publications

A Review of the Regulatory Energy Performance Gap and Its Underlying Causes in Non-domestic Buildings

A Review of the Regulatory Energy Performance Gap and Its Underlying Causes in Non-domestic Buildings

Do LEED-certified buildings save energy? Yes, but…

An insight into actual energy use and its drivers in high-performance buildings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About