Pierre Bull, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and Paul Mathew, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
A wide spectrum of laboratory owners ranging from universities to federal agencies have goals for energy efficiency in their facilities (e.g., the Energy Policy Act of 2005 for federal agencies). Laboratories, with their complex building systems and special health and safety requirements, are much more likely to meet energy efficiency goals if quantitative metrics (i.e., units of measure) and benchmarks (i.e., level of performance) are explicitly specified and tracked during the design of new buildings and the operation of existing buildings.
We introduce an action-oriented benchmarking protocol that can be used to specify and compute key energy efficiency metrics and benchmarks for laboratories. These metrics include the traditional whole-building energy use metrics (e.g., BTU/sf-yr), but more importantly, system-level metrics such as ventilation efficiency (W/cfm). The protocol is action-oriented in that it indicates how the metrics can be used to identify the presence or absence of energy efficiency features and opportunities. This protocol, which is being developed by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) with funding from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), builds on the Labs21 benchmarking tool as well as new developments in action-oriented benchmarking.
The primary target audience for the protocol is energy managers and commissioning agents, to help them track building and system efficiency and identify opportunities for efficiency improvement. When the protocol is fully developed, it will provide step-by-step guidance on how to collect data, compute metrics, and identify opportunities. Toward that end, the table below summarizes some of the key metrics, benchmarks for different levels of efficiency, and efficiency opportunities that the metrics can help identify.
Metric |
Benchmarks |
Application |
Whole building energy intensity |
1st Quartile in peer group (e.g. Site BTU/sf-yr from labs21 database) |
Screening for overall efficiency potential |
Ventilation |
||
Minimum laboratory ventilation rate |
6
ACH or 1cfm/sf |
Optimize ventilation rate for safety and energy efficiency |
Ventilation airflow efficiency (total supply + exhaust power/total supply + exhaust airflow) |
Good practice: 0.6 W/cfm Better practice: 0.3 W/cfm |
Low pressure drop design, fan efficiency |
Total system pressure drop (supply and exhaust) |
Good practice: ~6.2 in. w.g. Better practice: ~3.2 in. w.g. |
Low pressure drop duct design, low pressure drop coils, filters |
Fumehood airflow control ratio (average flow/minimum flow) |
Good practice: 2 Better practice: 1.5 |
Variable air volume hood sash management |
Fumehood density (hoods / unit lab area) |
Varies; Compare to similar facilities |
Optimize number of fumehoods; avoid excess fumehoods |
Heating and Cooling Note: Key metrics for chiller and boiler systems in laboratories are not different that those used in other commercial buildings - chiller efficiency (kW/ton), cooling load (tons/gsf), boiler efficiency (%), pumping efficiency (hp/gpm), etc. These are well-documented elsewhere (e.g. ASHRAE standards). Additional metrics important for laboratories are listed below. |
||
Temperature and humidity setpoints in laboratories |
ASHRAE 55 (for human comfort) |
Avoid overly restrictive temp and humidity tolerances; isolate sensitive equipment |
Chiller system minimum turndown ratio |
Good practice: 10% Better practice: 5% |
Right-size chiller systems; optimize chiller plant operation for low part loads |
Reheat energy use factor (ratio of reheat energy/total energy) |
Best practice: 0% (no reheat) |
Commission reheat controls; separate thermal and ventilation systems (e.g. use fan coils in labs) |
Process loads |
||
Design plug load intensity |
Compare to measured plug load intensity |
Right-size systems based on measured intensity. |
Measured plug load intensity |
Varies by lab function |
Right-size systems based on measured intensity. |
Lighting |
||
Required illuminance level |
Follow IESNA guidelines: 50 fc on horizontal surface |
Optimize lighting levels; avoid over-lighting |
Lighting power density |
Good
practice: 1.3 W/sf |
Efficient fixtures, lamps, ballasts |
These metrics can also be used to evaluate the design of new laboratory buildings, and may be included in programming documents.
Finally, it is important to note that benchmarking is most effective when it is properly integrated into the business process for organizational energy management. Key considerations:
View this entire presentation in
PDF format (4.4 MB, 30 pp)
Paul Mathew is a staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, where he works on applied research in energy efficiency and environmental sustainability in the built environment. His current work is focused on energy efficiency and green design for laboratories and other high-performance buildings; energy benchmarking tools and techniques; and risk analysis of energy efficiency projects. He has a Bachelor degree in Architecture, and a Ph.D. in Building Performance and Diagnostics from Carnegie Mellon University. His work experience includes technical research, tool development, and teaching in energy efficiency, sustainable design, and risk management. Prior to joining Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, he worked at Enron Energy Services and the Center for Building Performance at Carnegie Mellon University.