1. Benchmark-based Whole-Building Energy Performance Targets for UC Buildings Rashmi Sahai Sustainability Specialist University of California Office of the President October 8, 2013 rashmi.sahai@ucop.edu

2. Reasons to Move to Whole-Building Energy Performance Targets 1.California Energy Code Going to net zero 2.Static Baseline 3.Includes all building loads 4.Can carry design targets through to operations 5.Better integration with climate action goals

3. Benefits of Whole-Building Energy Performance Targets 2013 Code Change Base Load Energy Not Regulated by Title 24 Level of Energy Efficiency Needed to Meet 2030 Title 24 Net- Zero Policy Goal

4. Method Developed for UC Merced in 1999 Collected whole-campus energy use and floor area data from eight UC and CSU campuses (UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Irvine, UC Riverside, UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara, CSU Fresno, CSU Stanislaus) This building energy load data correlated reasonably well with climate parameters and with density of buildings containing complex space (e.g., labs) – regression created Regression equation used to develop climate-adjusted benchmarks for all other UC campuses.

5. Building Energy Performance Metrics Energy Use Intensity (EUI) (BTU/sf/yr) Annual Electricity Use (kWh/sf/yr) Annual Thermal Use (therms/sf/yr) Maximum Building Load (BTU/hr/sf) Maximum Power Load (W/sf) Max Chilled Water (tons/ksf) Maximum Thermal Load (therms/hr/ksf)

6. UC Building Energy Benchmarks by Campus Academic / Administrative Non-complex Space Campus Annual ElectricityMaximum PowerMax. Chilled WaterAnnual ThermalMax. Thermal kWh/gsf/yrW/gsftons/kgsftherms/gsf/yrtherms/hr/kgsf Includes prorated part of plant use and site lighting Includes prorated part of small peak (pumping) load at plant Load on plant Includes prorated part of plant use Berkeley11.23.1N/A0.210.12 Davis13.33.32.50.200.12 Irvine13.02.61.930.160.12 Los Angeles12.32.31.720.170.12 Merced14.33.52.60.200.12 Riverside13.93.32.50.180.12 San Diego12.22.21.660.160.12 San Francisco Parnassus 11.12.01.510.210.12 San Francisco Mission Bay 11.43.1N/A0.210.12 Santa Barbara11.52.21.660.190.12 Santa Cruz11.13.2N/A0.230.12

7. UC Building Energy Benchmarks by Campus Housing Non-complex Space Campus Annual ElectricityMaximum PowerMax. Chilled WaterAnnual ThermalMax. Thermal kWh/gsf/yrW/gsftons/kgsftherms/gsf/yrtherms/hr/kgsf Includes prorated part of plant use and site lighting Includes prorated part of small peak (pumping) load at plant Load on plant Includes prorated part of plant use Berkeley7.82.1N/A0.300.18 Davis9.32.31.750.290.18 Irvine9.11.791.350.230.18 Los Angeles8.61.601.200.240.18 Merced10.02.41.820.280.18 Riverside9.72.31.750.260.18 San Diego8.61.551.170.230.18 San Francisco Parnassus 7.81.401.060.300.18 San Francisco Mission Bay 8.02.1N/A0.300.18 Santa Barbara8.01.551.170.280.18 Santa Cruz7.82.2N/A0.320.18

8. UC Building Energy Benchmarks by Campus Lab/Complex Space Campus Annual ElectricityMaximum PowerMax. Chilled WaterAnnual ThermalMax. Thermal kWh/gsf/yrW/gsftons/kgsftherms/gsf/yrtherms/hr/kgsf Includes prorated part of plant use and site lighting Includes prorated part of small peak (pumping) load at plant Load on plant Includes prorated part of plant use Berkeley367.6N/A1.830.43 Davis386.34.71.830.43 Irvine385.64.21.780.43 Los Angeles375.44.11.790.43 Merced396.44.81.820.43 Riverside386.34.71.800.43 San Diego375.34.01.780.43 San Francisco Parnassus 365.23.91.840.43 San Francisco Mission Bay 367.6N/A1.840.43 Santa Barbara365.34.01.810.43 Santa Cruz367.6N/A1.850.43

9. Implementation at UC Merced Used in build-out of new campus Started with a target of 80% of benchmark, and decreased this to 65% of benchmark Design performance has been verified with measured data. Now design goal is 50% of benchmark All Buildings have gotten maximum points on LEED EA credit 1.

10. UC Santa Barbara Life Sciences Building Occupied in 2005, Certified LEED-EBOM Silver in 2010 Current Usage Compared to Benchmark Merced’s Target for New Construction

11. UC San Francisco Health Sciences West Occupied in 1966, Energy upgrades in last couple years Current Usage Compared to Benchmark

12. UC Davis Lab Buildings Current Usage Compared to Benchmark

13. References Brown, K., A. Daly, J. Elliott, C. Higgins, and J. Granderson. 2010. “Hitting the Whole Target: Setting and Achieving Goals for Deep Efficiency Buildings.” Proceedings of the 2010 ACEEE Summer Study of Energy Efficiency in Buildings. 3:28-39. Washington D.C.: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. Brown, K. 2002. "Setting Enhanced Performance Targets for a New University Campus: Benchmarks vs. Energy Standards as a Reference?" Proceedings of the 2002 ACEEE Summer Study of Energy Efficiency in Buildings. 4:29-40. Washington, D.C.: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. NBI. 2009a. “Measured Performance Case Study: Classroom and Office Building, UC Merced.” Available online: http://uc-ciee.org/buildings/ucmerced.html or http://www.newbuildings.org/document-library. New Buildings Institute. http://www.newbuildings.org/document-library NBI. 2009b. “Measured Performance Case Study: Science and Engineering Building I, UC Merced.” Available online: http://uc-ciee.org/buildings/ucmerced.html or http://www.newbuildings.org/document-library. New Buildings Institute. http://www.newbuildings.org/document-library