Overview of ASHRAE’s Advanced Energy Design Guide Series: How Did We Get Here? (ASHRAE SP-102) Don Colliver, Ph.D., P.E. Presidential Member / Fellow ASHRAE Univ of KY Chm, SP-102 Cognizant Committee

1975 ASHRAE accepts the challenge to develop information on energy efficient building design – ASHRAE 90-75

June 2002 – Honolulu ASHRAE Annual Meeting Recognized that standards language and format limit the ability to provide education and guidance during critical design phase. Challenge was given to ASHRAE to develop a suite of documents to achieve 30, 50 and 75% energy savings over Standard 90.1

June 2003 – Kansas City ASHRAE Annual Meeting Small group met – ExCom, TechC, TCs, other organizations Technology Council – Established Special Project 102 Charged with developing guidance on achieving 30% energy savings in buildings Assigned responsibility to Cognizant Committee

Cognizant Committee  Steering Committee Serve oversight and management function Responsible for setting direction and final approval of work of SP ASHRAE senior leadership TC 2.8 – Building Environmental Impact and Sustainability TC 7.6 – Systems Energy Utillization SSPC 90.1 IESNA AIA NBI DOE

Aug 2003 – Cognizant Committee met in Washington, DC Develop Partnership between organizations Identify purpose and scope Determine major participants in writing group Small, agile, skilled, interdisciplinary group Skill sets of individuals and representation needed on SP-102 writing committee Established SP Committee to implement the development and writing of document - Members from all the organizations Identify timeline of 1st project – goal of 1 year Develop white paper charge to SP-102 which discussed purpose, scope (included and not included), philosophy and intent of document

AEDG Purpose / Objectives: Achieve 30% energy savings over 90.1 Target audience: contractors, owners, design / build teams designers, operators Provide “how-to” design assistance to contractors and designers

Scope of Document: Not going to be able to “eat the entire elephant in one bite” – Scope must be managable Building type and size– office building < 20,000 ft 2 - most prevalent building type Base Criteria: Savings location specific not national aggregate 30% was a hard target – plug loads not included Focus on air-side distribution Need an easy-to-use, simple, and small document Not a code or code-intended document

Key Elements of Document and Development Process: A WAY – NOT THE ONLY WAY to achieve target Can’t be all things to all people and can’t cover all possibilities Not a standard or a code intended document Is intended to serve as initiator of additional ideas for designers Energy is independent variable & cost-effectiveness (e.g. payback) is dependent variable Quality assurance is integral part User friendly – Remember the audience Serves as a teaching tool Systems integration is critical

Key Elements of Document and Development Process: (cont) Provide both specific information and design concept intent information Provide “how-to-do” information Use products currently on the market & at least two manufacturers Plug loads – not included in savings credit Communication between CC and SP is critical Questions of direction resolved quickly CC Chair participated in SP meetings SP Chair participated in CC meetings

Key Elements of Document and Development Process: (cont) Document peer reviewed Three levels of Review – dates established and published well in advance 1 - Conceptual 2 - Technical Overview 3 - Final for errors Review handled by each organization AIA & IES – committee ASHRAE – 90.1, TC 2.8, TC 7.6, anyone requesting Review by SP group and also CC Develop process for getting other documents produced

Volunteer effort 11 person steering group 13 person writing team (SP-102) 5,000 + person-hours to develop

Where do we go from here? Topic of Current Discussions of CC 30% AEDG next building types Retail/Mercantile Subcategories A, B, C, … Highway lodging Warehouses Healthcare facilities Educational facilities Larger office buildings

Where do we go from here? (cont) Goal to produce two a year – staggered every 6 months Start Approve Publish Retail A – spring ’05 spring ’06 Jun ’06 Lodging – fall ’05 fall ’06 Dec ’07 Warehouse – spring ’06 spring ‘07 Jun ’07

Additional Document Savings Levels – 50% 75% A much more difficult problem Coordinated research is needed Need strategic plan to develop a coordinated approach of research and development

Lessons Learned: Commitment and enthusiasm are tremendous for this type project volunteer man-hours in development Short-term, well-defined commitment is easier to obtain Some expenses must be paid to get people needed Less “re-plowing ground” with compressed timeframe “Speed of business” can be achieved – if schedule is known and people can plan according Interdisciplinary team is critical – there is tremendous power in combining efforts

Lessons Learned: (cont) Organizations operate differently – Different professions need different types/styles of documents Multistage reviews are very beneficial Concept, technical, errors Users focus group – need to write pub for users – not authors Input from the users early is important

Lessons Learned: (cont) There is tremendous enthusiasm and interest in these type of documents This will be beneficial to all the organizations’ images We can achieve 30% energy savings with current technologies and “normal” appearance

Conclusions ASHRAE has heard and is responding to the requests of members to do more to giving guidance on how to design, build, and operate energy efficient buildings The framework has been established for producing additional documents.