Codes & Standards Enhancement (CASE) Processh-m-g.com/T24/Res_Topics/Res_HVAC_Mtg_1/ResHVAC... ·...

California Statewide Utility Codes and Standards Program

1

Heschong Mahone Group, Inc.Douglas Beaman Associates LLC

Bruce WilcoxApril 14, 2010

Introduction Residential Mechanical Stakeholder Meeting #1

CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE UTILITIES CODES AND STANDARDS PROGRAM

04/14/2010CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

2

Agenda

●

10:00–10:30 IntroductionOverview of 2011 Title 24 DevelopmentSummary of stakeholder purpose and process

●

10:30–11:30

Zoned A/C●

11:30–12:30 Residential Duct Efficiency12:30–1:15 Lunch

●

1:15–2:15 Refrigerant Charge2:15-2:30

Break

●

2:30–3:30 Residential HVAC Baseline●

3:30–4:30 Residential Lighting

●

4:30–5:00

Wrap up & next steps



3

IOU Support for 2011 Title 24

●

The California Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs) are actively supporting the California Energy Commission (CEC) in developing the state’s building energy efficiency standard (Title 24)

●

Their joint intent is to achieve significant

energy savings●

Through the development of reasonable,

responsible, and cost-

effective

code change proposals for the 2011 code update ●

And beyond

●

As part of the IOU effort, at the request of the CEC, we are hosting stakeholder meetings to get industry input and feedback on our code change proposals



4

Code Change Activity

●

2011 T-24 Case Code

●

2011 Reach Standard●

Voluntary standards for local governments●

Green Building Standard

●

Toward Zero Net Energy goal●

2014 T-24●

Future Reach Codes



5

Schedule: CEC Key Dates

●

Mar 2010 -

Dec 2010●

CEC develop foundation ●

IOUs:●

Conduct research, and cost effectiveness analysis●

Present results at stakeholder meetings

●

Dec 2010●

IOUs finalize code change proposals for submittal to CEC●

Feb 2011●

CEC opens Rulemaking for Title 24, develop 45-day language●

June 15, 2011●

Title 24 Adoption date●

Jan. 1, 2013●

Title 24 Implementation date



6

CASE Topics for 2011 Title 24 Cycle●

CASE Topics●

Zoned A/C●

Residential Duct Efficiency●

Refrigerant Charge●

Residential HVAC Baseline●

Residential Lighting

●

Each of the CASE Topics have Base Code and Reach Standard recommendations



7

Stakeholder Meetings Purpose

●

Publicize code change proposal●

Present to and solicit feedback from stakeholders on:●

Methodology●

Technology options●

Market status ●

Draft code language●

Gather additional information from stakeholders on:●

Best practices●

Product/technology availability●

Market penetration data●

Cost data



8

Stakeholder Meetings Process

●

Minimum of three meetings:●

First: present scope●

Code change direction and possible options●

Methodology

●

Second: present findings●

Results of data collection and analysis ●

Cost effectiveness●

“Strawman”

proposed code language

●

Third/final: present proposed code language

●

All meetings can be attended remotely



9

Types of Code Change

●

Mandatory Measure: The change would add or modify a mandatory measure●

Mandatory measures must be satisfied whether the prescriptive or performance method is used to show compliance

●

Prescriptive Requirement: The change would add or modify a prescriptive requirement that must be met when using prescriptive compliance approach●

When using performance compliance (computer modeling), prescriptive requirements define a standard design (which sets the energy budget) and are not mandatory



10

Types of Code Change – Ctd.

●

Compliance Option: The change would add or modify a new measure to the list of existing compliance options for meeting the Standards using the performance approach

●

Modeling: The change would modify the calculation procedures or assumptions used in making performance calculations. ●

This change would not add a compliance option or a new requirement, but would affect the way that trade-offs are made



11

Requirements for a Successful Code Change●

To be included in base code, a measure must:●

Be cost-effective ●

According to the Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) life-cycle costing methodology set out by the California Energy Commission

●

Be possible to implement using equipment that is readily available from multiple providers ●

Or that is reasonably expected to be available following the code change



12

Ground Rules

●

For those attending by telephone/web●

Please DO NOT place your phone on HOLD●

We do not want to hear your hold music●

Please mute your microphone, unless you want to speak●

Ask questions/comment by “chat”

or by voice●

We want to hear your concerns●

Opposing viewpoints are encouraged●

We are seeking information, not resolution●

Time is limited●

Raise your hand and be acknowledged by presenter●

Clearly state your name and affiliation prior to speaking●

Speak loudly for the people on the phone●

Minutes and presentation material will be distributed

●

If you are attending by phone,

DO NOT place your phone on HOLD


1

Zoned Air Conditioning Residential Mechanical Stakeholder Meeting #1



CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes 04/14/2010

22

Zoned A/C

●

Summary of current code requirements●

Typical practice

●

Summary of potential code change proposals●

Initial data/findings

●

Potential code change proposals●

Planned data collection and analysis

●

Specific stakeholder requests



3

Zoned A/C

Current Code Requirements

●

Prescriptive air flow requirement for 350 CFM/ton in every zonal mode, can be traded away

●

Performance credit (easier heating and cooling setpoints) for zonal systems ●

Capable of maintaining different set points in “living” and “sleeping”

zones

●

Common return OK●

No restrictions on system design, variable capacity control type, commissioning etc.



4

Zoned A/C

Typical Practice

●

Two types of zonal systems are common:●

Multiple systems, one for each zone●

High performance & high cost

●

Single system with dampered

supply ducts●

Return ducts are not zoned ●

Single speed compressors and fans can’t modulate to track load

●

Supply air flow is low, particularly with one zone calling●

Bypass ducts (short circuit from supply into return) are common

●

Results --

low EER



5

Zoned A/C

Potential Code Change Proposals

●

Expanded prescriptive requirements for systems seeking the current zonal AC performance compliance credit to eliminate problems and improve efficiency

●

Mandatory or prescriptive requirements for all zonal systems whether they seek credit or not

●

New credits for higher efficiency zonal systems●

Particularly for Reach Standards



6

Zoned A/C

California New Home Energy Survey

●

We have completed the survey of a random sample of 80 new 2007 CA homes and found:●

AC systems have low capacity and efficiency ●

Cooling air flow lower than the standard in 60% of systems

●

Cooling duct pressures are very high●

Cooling Fan Watts are high●

MF Duct Leakage is very high, while SF is pretty good



7

Zoned A/C

Why Air Conditioning is Important



8

Zoned A/C

Typical Air Conditioning in Palm Springs



9

4 AC units, 15.5 Tons, ~ 16 kW 5220 ft2, 337 ft2/ton



10

Zoned A/C

Survey Homes

●

40 Single family and 40 Multi-family●

Sample drawn from electric customers of SCE, PG&E and SDG&E

●

New homes 1st connected in 2007●

Probably built to 2005 T24 Standards●

Occupied for 2 years

●

Geographic distribution of surveys matched to sample at 3 digit zip level

●

Mailed invitation letter with prepaid reply letter, web site and 800 number for responses ●

Recruited by phone from responders

●

Occupants received $100 for participation



11

Zoned A/C

Homes by System TypeSingle Split System 32

Combined Hydronic Systems 10

Multiple Split Systems 9

Heat Pumps 7

Zoned Split Systems 7

Package System 5

Heat Only Systems 3

Radiant Floor System 3

PTAC systems 2

Resistance Electric System 1

Wall Furnace 1



12

Zoned A/C

AC Sensible Capacity

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Sens

ible

Cap

acity

at R

egis

ter /

Nom

inal

Tot

al

Cap

acity

Outdoor (Condenser Entering) Temperature, F



13

Zoned A/C

AC Sensible EER

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Sens

ible

Cap

acity

at R

egis

ter /

Tot

al W

atts

Outdoor (Condenser Entering) Temperature, F



14

Zoned A/C

Low AC Efficiency Is Caused By

● Low system air flow (~60%)

●

Restrictive return duct and filter system●

Restrictive Zoning●

Unnecessary dehumidification

●

Low airflow ●

Common manufacturer design for current SEER test

● High fan watts

●

Ignored by current SEER test.●

Low fan and motor efficiency●

Restrictive return duct and filter system●

TXV or charge failures (~60%)



15

Zoned A/C

AC Evaporator Air Flow

050

100150200250300350400450500

1 31 61

CFM

/Nom

inal

Ton

62 Units



16

Zoned A/C

Furnace Fan Power in Cooling

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1 30 59

Wat

t/CFM

61 Split and 10 Combined Hydronic Units

(Worst 6 are Zoned Systems with all zones calling)

CEC Prrescriptive

SEER Default



17

Zoned A/C

Furnace Fan Air Flow and Watts

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

CFM

/ton

Fan Watts/CFM

19 of 69 Meet 2008 Standard



18

Zoned A/C

Measured AC Pressure Drop



19

Zoned A/C

Average System Pressure Drop

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1

Pressure Drop, IW

C

Supply ducts

Cooling Coil

Return (including filter)



20

Zoned A/C

Total Duct Leakage @ 25 Pa

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

1 22 43

Leakage/40

0 CFM per ton

SF

Apartment

TownHouse

Criteria



21

Zoned A/C

SF Duct Leakage @ 25 Pa

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

1 22 43

Leak

age/

400

CFM

per

ton

To OutsideTotal



22

Zoned A/C

Apartment Duct Leakage @ 25 Pa

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

1

Leak

age/

400

CFM

per

ton

To Outside UnitTotal Leak



23

Zoned A/C

Town House Duct Leakage @ 25 Pa

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

1

Leak

age/

400

CFM

per

ton

To Outside UnitTotal Leak



24

Zoned A/C

Duct leakage Imbalance

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1 28 55

Frac

tion

of L

eaka

ge

56 Units

Return Leak Larger

Supply Leak Larger


CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes 04/14/20102011 Title 24 CASE Process Update

25

Zoned A/C

Duct leakage Imbalance

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1 28 55

Frac

tion

of L

eaka

ge

56 Units

Median Imbalance 17%



26

Zoned A/C

Duct Leakage Summary

●

½

of SF ducts meet the prescriptive standard●

NO MF ducts meet the prescriptive standard●

Need clarification of “inside the conditioned space” for MF

●

Propose “inside the unit”●

Median system leakage 17% imbalanced●

Current T24 assumes balanced leakage●

Modeled correctly in 2011 CALRES



27

Zoned A/C

Back to Zoning

●16”uninsulated

bypass duct in the attic



28

Zoned A/C


●

Eliminate performance path zoning credit●

Cooling zoning is for comfort, not energy savings●

New Mandatory Requirements for all Zoned Systems (now part of prescriptive air flow)

●

No bypasses●

Minimum CFM/ton in all modes



29

Zoned A/C

Planned Data Collection and Analysis

●

Developing Simple ACM style model for typical systems

●

Calculate EER at register for specified system configuration and conditions

●

Parametric analysis of energy impact●

Use the field study to provide base case

●

Actual air flow in different zonal modes ●

Tons at the register in different zonal modes●

Intensive field investigation of 2 homes

●

Validate simple model●

Life Cycle Cost of zoning alternatives

● Review and comment by stakeholders


CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes

Zoned A/C

Stakeholder Feedback

●

CASE team to develop proposed measures●

Seek stakeholder review and feedback on proposed measures relating to●

Measure costs●

Availability●

Market practices



31

Zoned A/C

QUESTIONS & COMMENTS


1

Residential Duct Efficiency Residential Mechanical Stakeholder Meeting #1

Douglas BeamanDouglas Beaman

Associates LLCApril 14, 2010



22

Residential Duct Efficiency

●

CASE scope●

Summary of current code requirements

●

Typical practice●

Summary of potential code change proposals

●

Initial data/findings●

Potential code change proposals

●

Planned data collection and analysis●




33


CASE Scope

●

Maximum duct pressure drop●

Mandatory duct testing

●

Fan watt draw●

Cooling coil airflow



44

Residential Duct Efficiency History of Mechanical Code in Residential Standards

New Construction Alteration (Change-Outs)

1998 Standards Duct Testing NA

Manual D

2005 Standards TXV or RCM TXV or RCM

Maximum Cooling Capacity Duct Testing

Cooling Coil Airflow (450 cfm/ton)

Fan Watt Draw (0.58 w/cfm)



5

New Construction Alterations (change-outs)

Duct Testing

Prescriptive Measure All CLZ’s

Duct Testing

Prescriptive Measure CLZ’s

2, 9-16

RCM

Prescriptive Measure CLZ's

2, 8-15RCM

Prescriptive Measure CLZ's

2, 8-15

Cooling Coil Airflow (350 cfm/ton) Cooling Coil Airflow (350 cfm/ton)

Maximum Duct Pressure DropNo Direct Standard

Maximum Duct Pressure DropNo Direct Standard

Residential Duct Efficiency 2008 Mechanical Code in Residential Standards



6


Current Code Requirements●

Maximum duct pressure drop●

Is only addressed indirectly in the current standards via the optional credit for cooling coil airflow or in other performance based credits



7


Typical PracticeHVAC Measure Typical Practice

Duct Testing Common in hot CZ’s. Uncommon in mild CZ’s.

Fan Watt Draw Seldom Used in Compliance, will become more common w/ 2008 Standards due to alteration rules.

Cooling Coil Airflow Essentially unused in previous standards. Likely will be more common with 2008 Standards.

Maximum Duct Pressure Drop

Not measured by installing contractor.Calculated by designer if using ACCA Manual D (not common).


CA Utilities 2011 Title 24 Stakeholder Meeting for Proposed Code Changes


Potential Code Change ProposalsMeasure Proposal

Duct Testing Mandatory

Fan Watt Draw Adjust fan watt standard to reflect current motor efficiency

Cooling Coil Airflow a. Set standard CFM/ton value

b. Duct sizing guideline

Duct Pressure Drop a. Set standard for duct pressure drop

b. Duct sizing guideline

04/14/2010

8



9


Duct Sizing Guidelines

●

New construction ●

Minimum return duct sizing●

Easier to use supply duct guidelines

●

Alterations (change-outs)●

Minimum return duct sizing ●

Likely to require additional return duct or enlarged return



10


Initial Data / Findings

●

Field Study previously described by Bruce Wilcox



11



●

Maximum duct pressure drop ●

Establish prescriptive duct pressure drop standard plus

●

Methodology to standardize technique to measure duct pressure drop



12



●

Mandatory duct testing●

Duct testing in previous code cycles has been shown to be cost effective

●

There is still significant contractor resistance to duct testing when they can “trade-off”

other measures



13



●

Fan watt draw●

The indoor fan uses significantly more energy than commonly assumed

●

2008 ●

0.58 w/cfm

x 2000 cfm

= 1,160 watts



14


Potential Code Change Proposals●

Duct sizing guidelines●

Low airflow is common as reported earlier by Bruce Wilcox

●

Duct design is a significant factor ●

Establishing duct sizing guidelines would require significant retraining●

Training to change field practices such as smooth bends and adding additional return ducts



15


Planned Data Collection and Analysis●

Data collection ●

Has been performed as part of the previously described Wilcox/Proctor/Chitwood

field study

●

Data will be analyzed ●

To determine if specific recommendations can be made based on findings

●

Duct sizing tables ●

Will be developed by the CASE team



16


Specific Stakeholder Requests

●

Technical barriers are minimal for any of these proposals

●

Duct testing in California ●

Started in the mid-1990s●

We have a large body of contractors and raters capable of sealing duct systems and testing

●

Duct design & changes to duct sizing rules of thumb ●

Will be a challenge●

What are the challenges to have contractors adopt new duct sizing guidelines?



17




11

Refrigerant Charge and A/C Quality Residential Mechanical Stakeholder Meeting #1




2

04/14/2010

22

AC Quality

●


Typical practice

●



●





3

04/14/2010

3

Current Prescriptive AC Charge Requirement (can be traded away) ●

Qualified technicians can use refrigerant gauges and industry standard approaches when indoor and outdoor temperatures are within specified ranges

●

Outdoor temperature above 55 degrees F is a major constraint in winter

OR●

HERS raters and others can use temperature sensors attached to the refrigerant piping when conditions are within the same ranges

OR



4

04/14/2010

4

Current Prescriptive AC Charge Requirement (can be traded away)

● A Charge Indicating Device (CID) meeting specifications in the Standards that continuously monitors charge and signals problems to the home occupant can be installed

OR

● The contractor can weigh in the refrigerant

● In addition, TXV function is required to be verified using one of the first 3 approaches



5

04/14/2010

5

Refrigerant Charge & AC Quality

Typical Practice

●

Many systems, particularly in coastal climates are inoperable or have shockingly low EERs

●

Until this year contractors typically ignored charge and considered their job done if cold air came out ●

2008 Standards allowed TXVs

as an alternate to charge testing, but did not require TXV function testing

●

Field survey found TXV or charge failures in ~60% of homes built in 2007

●

Field survey found approximately 70% of homes built in 2007 had low airflow



6

04/14/2010

6


Typical Practice

●

Starting January 2010 TXVs

no longer get credit so charge testing is a compliance issue for the first time●

Cold weather caused severe problems this year when charge testing and verification could not be completed for new homes. ●

A new cold weather procedure is needed

●

CIDs not on market yet and testing is desirable●

Many contractors do not test and set charge properly



7

04/14/2010

7


Example of Typical Practice

●

TXV sensing bulb never installed in occupied 2007 home



8

04/14/2010

8



●

Mandatory charge/AC performance testing for all AC systems

●

New and improved approaches●

Test and validation of CIDs●

Validation of new cold weather charge/AC performance testing and verification approach

●

Comparison of alternative charge/AC performance tests



9

04/14/2010

9



● Laboratory testing program● Typical residential split AC system● Install available CIDs from all manufacturers● Vary test conditions to cover full expected range

● Outdoor temperature (summer and winter)● Evaporator air flow● TXV installation and function● Refrigerant amount and contamination

●

Simultaneously apply all of the test procedures, compare results and revise procedures as required

● Field test program (potential)● Apply procedures to selected field survey homes



10

04/14/2010

10


Planned Data Collection and Analysis●

Life Cycle Cost Analysis ●

Estimate cost of charge/AC performance approaches ●

Calculate value of energy savings for improved charge/AC performance

●

Compare with California Energy Commission LCC criteria



11


Stakeholder Feedback

●

CASE team to develop proposed measures●

Seek stakeholder review and feedback on proposed measures relating to●

Measure costs●

Market practices



12

04/14/2010

12




11

Residential HVAC Baseline Residential Mechanical Stakeholder Meeting #1

Abhijeet

PandeHeschong

Mahone Group, Inc.April 14, 2010



222

Residential HVAC Baseline Efficiency

●


Typical practice

●



●



●




33



●

Mechanical air conditioning is assumed as the baseline for all residential new construction in the performance approach●

Buildings constructed with/without air conditioning need to show compliance with Title 24 assuming minimum efficiency air conditioners

●

Building envelope requirements same for buildings with and without air conditioning

●

HVAC baseline efficiency set by Federal Standards●

Currently at SEER 13 for residential air conditioning



44



●

Energy credit for indirect evaporative cooling systems in performance approach●

Modeled as SEER 13 (Split Dx) or EER 13 depending on outdoor wet-bulb and system capacity



55

Saturation of Air Conditioning Units in California Homes

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Before 1975 1975-1978 1979-1983 1984-1991 1992-1996 1997-2000 2001-2003

Home Vintage

% H

ouse

hold

s w

ith A

/C

Yes Central A/C Yes Room A/C No Central A/C No Room A/C

Source: 2004 RASS Database


Typical Practice



66

Source: 2004 RASS Database


Typical Practice



7


Typical Practice●

HVAC energy projected to be 45% of total peak consumption in the coming years.

●

Reducing or eliminating this peak consumption●

While still maintaining occupant comfort therefore needs to be addressed

●

If we are to meet the energy challenges of the (near) future

7



88



●

Residential HVAC baseline efficiency●

Higher SEER/EER requirements based on recent negotiations between AHRI/CEC/ACEEE

●

Improved credit for evaporative cooling systems●

For reach code HVAC baselines using non-traditional systems

●

Compressorless Comfort Homes●

In coastal areas, baseline building without air conditioning●

Reduced cooling loads for Inland areas●

Potentially more stringent envelope and fenestration requirements inland and coastal

●

Thermal Comfort Model in performance compliance calculations ●

To prove home will stay comfortable



99



●

Higher efficiency projects increasingly looking at reducing HVAC loads ●

Through better construction practices, innovative building solutions and higher efficiency HVAC systems

●

AHRI/ACEEE/CEC Agreement●

ASHRAE Standard 55 Comfort Metrics



10



●

Agreement between ●

Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) ●

American Council for and Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) ●

Alliance to Save Energy (Alliance)●

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)●

Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnership (NEEP)●

Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP)●

California Energy Commission (CEC)

●

Multi-prong strategy●

Amend Energy Policy and Conservation Act●

Advocate DOE to adopt proposed requirements into national standards

●

Provide path for regional standards to exceed federal minimum efficiencies



11



●

Agreement covers:●

Energy efficiency standards, test procedures, metrics and building code provisions for ●

Residential central air conditioners, heat pumps, and weatherized and non-weatherized furnaces

●

Agreement also addresses issues involving preemption of building codes and multiple metrics

●

Agreement divides country into three regions●

North –

population weighted Heating Degree Days (HDD) ≥

5000

●

South –

population weighted HDD ≤

5000●

Southwest –

Arizona, California, Nevada and New Mexico



12



●

AHRI Agreement●

Higher efficiency levels●

SEER and EER for A/C and HP (split and central)●

AFUE for furnaces

●

A/C and HP ratings●

DOE test procedures for residential central A/C and HP to be amended to calculate SEER and HSPF based on

–

Temperature bin data for single-speed, two-capacity and variable-speed compressor systems



13



●

AHRI Efficiency Agreement●

Allows California to have higher efficiencies than federal standards for new construction and significant upsizing

●

These levels come into effect January 1, 2013



14



●

ASHRAE Standard 55-2004: “Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy”●

Specifies conditions in which majority of occupants in the space

will find the space thermally comfortable

●

Based on “Predicted Mean Vote (PMV)”

and “Predicted Percent of Dissatisfied (PPD)”

or PMV-PPD metric●

PMV-PPD based on field evaluations and meta-analysis

●

Two personal variables: Activity, Clothing●

Four environmental variables: Temperature, Thermal Radiation, Humidity and Air Speed



15



●

ASHRAE Standard 55-2004●

PMV is an index that predicts the mean value of votes of a large group of persons on a 7-point thermal sensation scale

●

PPD is an index of percentage of people thermally dissatisfied based on the PMV

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

Cold Cool Slightly Cool Neutral Slightly

Warm Warm Hot



16


ASHRAE Standard 55-2004



1717

Residential HVAC Baseline Efficiency Related Potential Code Change Proposal

●

Develop Prescriptive Requirements for a Compressorless Comfort Home ●

Emphasize load reduction strategies●

Improved envelopes –

Higher insulation, quality insulation, advanced construction techniques

●

Passive Solar designs●

Night-ventilation and whole-house ventilation

●

Cost-effectiveness analysis will evaluate energy savings against●

Increased cost of envelope●

Reduced cost of air conditioning



1818



●

Develop Prescriptive Requirements for higher efficiency HVAC systems●

Cost-effectiveness analysis of AHRI agreement specified efficiency levels

●

Develop Performance Path Requirements●

Thermal Comfort Metrics●

Improved credits for evaporative cooling systems

●

Develop Reach Code requirements for HVAC using alternative systems



1919



●

Energy Modeling●

Use new modeling capabilities in development version of CALRES for 2011 Title 24 code

●

Current Packaged D requirements as baseline for analysis

●

Compare energy savings and thermal comfort improvements

●

Life Cycle Costing Analysis●

Compare measure savings against costs using CEC LCC criteria



2020



●

Feedback on measure/product●

Technical information●

Market practices●

Costs and availability●

Product development plans



2121




1

Residential Lighting Residential Mechanical Stakeholder Meeting #1

Owen HowlettHeschong

Mahone Group, Inc.April 14, 2010



2


●


Typical practice

●

Code change options●


●

Planned data analysis●




3

●

Current code requirements●

T-24 requires high-efficacy lighting in spaces●

Allows use of low-efficacy lighting in some spaces,

in conjunction with controls

●

Code attempts to balance:●

Savings, costs, user choice

●

Changing market conditions●

High-efficacy lamps such as LED and GU-24 now allow more user choice ●

Potentially bringing the goal of all-high-efficacy closer





4


Current Code Requirements – Ctd.

●

High efficacy luminaires

must not be:●

Edison screw base, except:●

HID luminaires

with integral ballast●

Luminaires

with GU-24 base, except:–

Recessed downlights

for CFLs

●

Low voltage incandescent●

Track lighting



5

Kitchens =>50% of lighting must be high efficacy

Bathrooms, garages, laundry rooms, closets, utility rooms

High efficacy; or low efficacy with manual-on occupant sensor

All other rooms High efficacy; or low efficacy with dimmer or manual-on occupant sensor


Current Code Requirements – Ctd.



6


Typical Practice

House Area vs Installed Wattage

y = 1.2223x + 127.89

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

House area (sf)

Inst

alle

d lig

htin

g (W

)

Source: 2010 California New Home Energy Survey, funded by a PIER Building Energy Research Grant , and by the Statewide Utility Codes and Standards Program.

Residential LPD is higher than most commercial LPDs

-

approximately 1.2 W/sf, plus 150 W /dwelling



7

Room type Mean installed power (W)

Bedrooms 130-200Kitchens 250Living and dining rooms 200-320Bathrooms 180-300Utility 65Closets 40-85

●

Mean installed lighting power by room type (both permanently installed and portable lighting)


Typical Practice – Ctd.




8

●

PIER new construction survey found the following distributions of lamp type and wattage

Number of fixtures by Lamp Type

32%

8%2%

58%

0%

CFL

Flr

Hal

Inc

LED

Wattage by Lamp Type

14%

5%

4%

77%

0%

CFL

Flr

Hal

Inc

LED






9

Incandescent (A-lamp) Wattage per Lamp

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

8 10 15 16 25 30 38 40 46 50 52 57 60 65 71 75 100 150

Lamp power (W)

Perc

enta

ge o

f lam

ps

Incandescent A-lamps are either 40W or 60-65W

There are very few 100W A-lamps in use





10

Almost all CFLs are 13-26 W

(both pin-based and screw-based)

The mean wattage is 21 W for pin-based and 17.5 W for screw-

based

CFL wattage per lamp

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

3 9 11 13 14 15 18 20 23 26 28 30 36 38 40 55 60

Lamp power (W)

Perc

enta

ge o

f ins

talle

d la

mps

screw-based CFLs pin-based CFLs





11



●

Lamp types used in residential screw-base cans, recent construction 20101

●

Incandescent 82%●

CFL

18%●

Estimated1

Spiral CFL

74%●

Estimated1

Reflector CFL 7%●

Estimated1

Other 19%

1. PIER Residential Lighting Market Survey 20102. Estimated from Residential Lighting Metering Study (KEMA, 2009).



12



●

Projections of market share going forward●

New Federal lamp standards come into effect 2012, don't affect incandescent lamp efficacy very much

●

EISA allows California to enact a requirement for 45 lm/W beginning January 2018, nationally 2020

●

Major manufacturers will release mass market LED replacement lamps 2010



13


Code Change Proposals

●

Changes to the Base Code●

Compliance credit for all high-efficacy lighting●

Clarification of requirements and removal of some exceptions from 2008 code

●

New Reach Code requirements●

Require all high-efficacy lighting●

Caps on lighting wattage●

Allow self-ballasted high-efficacy lighting in recessed CFL fixtures



14


Base Code Change Proposal

●

An energy credit that would give builders a credit for installing all-high-efficacy lighting●

Credit would be in the form of Btu/sf/yr●

Credit would be voluntary●

Credit could be traded for other energy systems



15

●

Clarification of requirements and removal of exceptions from 2008 code●

Clarify requirements for “high efficacy”

lighting●

Remove certain exceptions to high-efficacy lighting●

Current lighting practice can be gleaned from existing data


Base Code Change Proposal – Ctd.



16


Reach Code Change Proposal

●

Require all-high-efficacy lighting●

Prescriptive or mandatory requirement●

Same criteria as base code energy credit to define all- high-efficacy



17

●

A lighting budget that sets limit on amount of energy used by lighting. This could take several forms:●

Maximum wattage per lamp●

Maximum wattage per fixture●

Maximum wattage per room●

Maximum wattage per house

●

Requirement could be prescriptive and/or mandatory


Reach Code Change Proposal – Ctd.



18

●

Allow self-ballasted lamps in recessed CFL fixtures, in some rooms●

Most likely in rooms that have low hours of use, in which heat build-up is likely to be low

●

This judgment would be based on lamp performance data and discussions with lamp manufacturers and testers


Reach Code Change Proposal – Ctd.



19


Planned Data Analysis

●

Calculate luminaire

wattage cap, conduct photometric calculations

●

Calculate energy credit, and savings from wattage caps Synthesize:●

Field data on installed equipment from PIER study and RASS

●

Field data on hours of use from KEMA metering study and HMG study



20


Planned Data Analysis – Ctd.

●

Judge heat build-up in self-ballasted luminaires, calculate luminaire

on-time per use, using KEMA

and/or HMG field data●

Calculate cost-effectiveness of all-high-efficacy, compare savings with pricing survey data

●

Calculate savings from allowing self-ballasted recessed fixtures, estimate efficacy increase and market penetration of LED over life of luminaires

●

Also need to know approximate split of single vs. twin lamp recessed CFL fixtures



21



●

Technical information on lamps and luminaires, particularly the effect of heat on performance and lamp life

●

Market trends for luminaire

and lamp types in various rooms types

●

Estimates of the effect of forthcoming federal lamp standards

●

Cost data on typical luminaires

and lamps●

Product development plans



22



Codes & Standards Enhancement (CASE) Processh-m-g.com/T24/Res_Topics/Res_HVAC_Mtg_1/ResHVAC... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Codes & Standards Enhancement (CASE) Processh-m-g.com/T24/Res_Topics/Res_HVAC_Mtg_1/ResHVAC... ·...