Building Innovation

Guide to High-Performance Energy-Efficient Buildings in India

“BIG Guide”
Reshma Singh
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), USA
12th Dec 2018. Berkeley, CA

1
 1  Context for BIG
1  The Problem
2  High-performance building (green, smart, healthy X TBL)
3  Stakeholders

2  Principles
1  Triple bottom-line
2  Lifecycle Approach
3  Sequential Methodology

3  Process
1  Case Studies
2  Energy Simulations
3  Expert Opinion

4  Deep Dive into BIG

1  Whole building
2  Envelope, plugs, and lighting
Outline

3  Low energy cooling and controls

4  Energy data and decision-making

5  Conclusions
1  Primary drivers
2  8 Key metrics
3  MoScoW matrix
4  Design, Build, Operate, Procure “BIG” DOWNLOAD:
BIT.LY/BUILDINGINNOVATIONGUIDE 2
Part I: Context

3
 CONTEXT
Explosive growth in building footprint in emerging economies like India
Context

4
SOURCES: EIA (2012), ECO-III (2011)
 SO WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?
Skyrocketing building energy use
U.S. India

~8 quads
~38 quads

Buildings consume ~30% of total energy

Buildings consume ~40% of total energy
Total energy use= ~24 Quads
Total energy use= ~97 Quads (EIA 2018) 8% annual growth in building energy
350
Average EUI (kWh/m2-yr)
300
250
298
200
150 (100 kBtu/
sqft-yr)
202
(70
100 kBtu/
sqft-yr)
50
0
US India SOURCES: EIA (2018), IEA (2015), MOSPI (2017), CBERD (2018)
5
 SO WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?
Increased space use intensity

BAU-1 BAU-2 BAU-2

Context

6
BAU: Business-As-Usual
 What are the consequences if we don’t change the status quo?

Environmental impact
Urban heat, carbon emissions, SOx, NOx, Polluted,
Building PM 2.5, methane
unhealthy,
energy expensive
use and Human comfort impact
Task performance, absenteeism, built
waste health symptoms, and productivity environment
Financial impact =
A high toll
Context

High facilities management, waste, churn

and vacancy cost

7
Context: US & Indian offices

8
 CHARACTERIZING THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING STOCK:
floor space OFFICE TYPOLOGY

Gme
Context

9
 floor space

1
Gme
Context

1.  Indigenous 2. BAU: RCC, punched windows 3. BAU: RCC, high glazed 4. TARGET: High performance
UncondiEoned Decentralized cooling Centralized cooling InnovaEve cooling
Low energy Medium energy use High energy use Low energy use
Low service level Low-medium service level High service level High service levels
Arguable comfort Low-medium comfort Medium comfort AdapEve comfort
Low cost Medium cost High cost Medium cost
10
 floor space

1 2
Gme
Context

1.  Indigenous 2. BAU1: RCC, punched windows 3. BAU: RCC, high glazed 4. TARGET: High performance
UncondiEoned Decentralized cooling Centralized cooling InnovaEve cooling
Low energy Medium energy use High energy use Low energy use
Low service level Low-medium service level High service level High service levels
Arguable comfort Low-medium comfort Medium comfort AdapEve comfort
Low cost Medium cost High cost Medium cost

BAU: Business as Usual BAU: Business as Usual 11 11

 floor space

1 2 3
Gme
Context

1.  Indigenous 2. BAU1: RCC, punched windows 3. BAU2: RCC, high glazed 4. TARGET: High performance
UncondiEoned Decentralized cooling Centralized cooling InnovaEve cooling
Low energy Medium energy use High energy use Low energy use
Low service level Low-medium service level High service level High service levels
Arguable comfort Low-medium comfort Medium comfort AdapEve comfort
Low cost Medium cost High cost Medium cost

BAU: Business as Usual 12

 floor space

1 2 3 4
Gme
Context

1.  Indigenous 2. BAU1: RCC, punched windows 3. BAU2: RCC, high glazed 4. TARGET: High performance
UncondiEoned Decentralized cooling Centralized cooling InnovaEve cooling
Low energy Medium energy use High energy use Low energy use
Low service level Low-medium service level High service level High service levels
Arguable comfort Low-medium comfort Medium comfort AdapEve comfort
Low cost Medium cost High cost Medium cost

BAU: Business as Usual

13
14
 BUILDING INNOVATION FOR INDIA
(And other warm-climate regions with similar construction and developmental contexts)

Codes & Standards

RaGng system CerGficaGon

Context

15
Transformative tools, A shared set of values and
technologies and metrics that resonate across
approaches to buildings stakeholders
accelerate high-
performance buildings
Inventive combinations of
building wisdom and
Based on a triple- technology innovation
bottom-line framework validated through building
for the building energy simulation, case
lifecycle studies, and expert opinion.

DEMOCRATIZE, DIGITIZE, DECARBONIZE

16
17
Acknowledging the contribution of our collaborators whose pursuit for creation of high-performance and
low-energy buildings led us to an integrated methodology for the creation of this book.

Metro Valley
Infosys
Wipro Ecoenergy
AB Lall Architects
Development Alternatives
Environmental Design Solutions
Paharpur Building Center
Godrej, Sears, Nirlon
Integrative Design Solutions
Kukreja Associates
Kalpakrit Sustainable Environments
Paharpur Building Center
PS Collective
Sterling India Ltd.
Synefra

Thank you also to our allies

USGBC- GBCI, IGBC, USIBC, CSIS, AEEE, TERI, NRDC, CA Governors Office

CBERD partners
CEPT University, IIIT- Hyderabad, MNIT Jaipur, IIT Bombay, Auroville CSR
Carnegie Mellon University, UC Berkeley, RPI, ORNL

And to our funder the U.S. Department of Energy, and it’s collaborator agency USAID
18
Part 2: Principles

19
 Schedule
PROFIT PLANET
Financial Natural
Capital Capital
Quality
and
Performance

Scope Cost
PEOPLE
Principles

Human
Capital

1. Establish a Triple Bottom Line Framework for

Building Investment Decisions 20
Principles

21
SOURCE: CBERD.ORG
Principles

2. Develop a Whole-Building Life-cycle Performance Framework

SOURCE: CBERD.ORG 22
Principles

3. Implement a Sequential Approach 23

Part 3: Process

24
Process: Examine end- uses
TYPICAL OFFICE IT/ITES OFFICE

20% 15% 45%

HVAC
60%
20% Plugs
Lights 40%

Electricity end-use consumption for

a typical commercial office (left) and an IT office (right) in India

25
 1. CASE STUDIES

•  15, across 4
climate zones

•  Mix of owner-
occupied and
tenanted

•  Site visits, with

access to typ.
Process

operational
data and/or
drawings
26
 2. BUILDING ENERGY SIMULATIONS
176 runs, 2 baselines, 4 passive
and 4 active strategies
•  4 climate zones X 4 orientaEons X 2
base cases, 7+2 best pracEce suites*
= parametric analysis using min. 176
simulaGon runs, with iteraGons
•  ConstrucEon basis specifically from the
Indian context
•  4 major passive strategies: form,
envelope, natural venElaEon, night
Process

flush
•  4 HVAC operaGon types: mixed mode,
VAV, VRF, radiant
27
 3. EXPERT OPINIONS
300.0

250.0

Whole Building Energy [kWh/m²/year]

200.0

150.0

100.0

50.0

0.0
BAU ECBC BP1 BP1 BP2 BP2 BP3 BP4 BP5 BP6 BP7

OpEmal OpEmal Shadings Low Energy Plugs Daylight Control Night Flush Mixed-Mode Radiant Cooling Radiant (COP7) VRF Systems
FenestraEon

Business-as-Usual Code-Compliant OpEmized Envelope Reduced Internal Loads Passive Cooling Strategies Improved Cooling System
Process

•  Squint tests, state of art, state of practice insights from India experts
•  Rationalization and prioritization by leveraging Berkeley Lab’s R&D expertise

28
 SIMULATION MODEL:
Assumptions and Parameters

Common practice Envelope and Systems

Bldg. Dimension: 50 x 33m | Shell ComposiGon: Brick | Wall: U
= 2.18 W/m²K | Roof: U = 2.18 W/m²K | Solar ReflecGon: 30% |
Thermal emicance: 90%
Windows: Simple Glazing, Aluminum Frame | WWR: 80% | U =
BAU
5.62 W/m²K | SHGC: 0.48 | VLT = 48%
HVAC System: PTAC VAV MulE-Zone with Water Cooling Coil |
Process

Chiller: COP = 5.1 | VAV Terminal with Electric Reheat

Occupancy: 10 m²/pers | LPD: 10 W/m² | Plug Loads Density:
10.8 W/m² | VenGlaGon: 8.5 m³/h/pers + 1 m³/h/m²
 Common pracGce Envelope and Systems
Bldg. Dimension: 50 x 33m | Shell ComposiEon: Brick | Wall: U = 2.18 W/m²K | Roof: U = 2.18 W/m²K | Solar ReflecEon: 30% | Thermal emiqance: 90%
Baselines BAU Windows: Simple Glazing, Aluminum Frame | WWR = 80% | U = 5.62 W/m²K | SHGC = 0.48 | VLT = 48%
HVAC System: PTAC VAV MulE-Zone with Water Cooling Coil | Chiller: COP = 5.1 | VAV Terminal with Electric Reheat
Occupancy: 10 m²/pers | LPD = 10 W/m² | Plug Loads Density = 10.8 W/m² | VenElaEon = 8.5 m³/h/pers + 1 m³/h/m²

ECBC-compliant Envelope and Systems

Shell ComposiEon: Brick, GlassWool | Wall: U = 0.44 W/m²K | Cool Roof: U = 0.41 W/m²K | Solar ReflecEon: 70% | Thermal emiqance: 90%
ECBC Windows: Double Glazing, Vinyl/Wood Frame | WWR = 50% | U = 3.30 W/m²K | SHGC = 0.22 | VLT = 50% | Overhangs depth: 0.6 m
LPD = 10 W/m²K | Plug Loads Density = 10 W/m²K

OpGmized Envelope
Building Dimension: 80 x 20m
BP1 Window-to-Wall RaEo: North = 40% / South = 30% / East and West = 0%
Fins on North Façade and Overhangs on South (depth depending on locaEon)
Best Practices Cases

Reduced Internal Loads

BP2 LPD = 5 W/m² | Plug Loads = 7.5 W/m²
DaylighEng Control: Two sensors (3m and 6m away from window) | Setpoint: 300 lux

Night Flush VRF System

Radiant System
Purge Flow Rate: 5 ACH CAV VenElaEon
BP3 Trigger: Tout < Tins BP5 Loop: 12°C – 16°C
Heat Pump: COP = 5
BP7 Cooling System COP = 4
Minimum Tins = 25°C One Evaporator per Zone

Mixed Mode HVAC Suite

BP4 Natural VenElaEon: 5 ACH
Control: Maintaining 80% adapEve comfort
BP6 Radiant Ceiling + passive cooling strategies
Chiller COP = 7 30
 280
300.0

268
Hot and Dry (Jaipur) Composite (New Delhi)

253
Warm and Humid (Mumbai) Moderate (Bangalore)

232
250.0
Whole Building Energy [kWh/m²/year]

200.0

146
146
144

138
138

137
136
136

134
125
150.0

115

114

106
104
99

93

92
90

89

88
86

85
84
83

82
82

80

80
100.0

79

78
72

72

69
69
64

62
61

61
60
53
50.0

0.0
BAU ECBC BP1 BP1 BP2 BP2 BP3 BP4 BP5 BP6 BP7
Process

OpEmal OpEmal Low Energy Daylight Night Flush Mixed-Mode Radiant Radiant VRF Systems
FenestraEon Shadings Plugs Control Cooling (COP7)
Business-as- Code- OpEmized Envelope Reduced Internal Loads Passive Cooling Strategies Improved Cooling System
Usual Compliant

Modeled data using parametric analysis in the EnergyPlus modeling platform

31
 Modeling results using three aspects:
1. Total energy consumption per unit area, or Energy Performance Index (EPI):
•  To assess the energy performance of a model at the whole-building level.
•  Use energy consumption by end use to determine if a particular end use needs to be improved or if potential
savings are negligible.
For Builder/Owner, lower EPI= lowered CapEx, O&M and replacement cost

2. Total heat gains and losses of the building

•  To indicate potential passive measures to reduce cooling and ventilation loads.
•  In hot climate zones, energy efficient envelopes promote heat losses and avoid superfluous external heat gains.
For Architect/Engineer, lower external heat gain= more flexibility in design; further
enhanced innovative, efficient cooling systems

3. Occupant thermal discomfort

•  Assessed based on # hours where predicted percentage dissatisfied (PPD) exceeds 20%.
Process

•  In ASHRAE Standard-55, a design is considered to be comfortable when this value does not exceed 4% of the
total occupied time.
•  The discomfort value is used to validate that the HVAC system is providing adequate comfort.
For Facility operator/ Tenant, better thermal comfort = fewer complaints, better
health, productivity, and tenant retention
32
 STUDY OF PROBLEM AREAS
Period
AND SOLUTIONS conducive for
night cooling

META-ANALYSIS 1: COMFORT MODEL FOR
AC AND MIXED MODE (MM) BUILDINGS
•  Fanger’s model used as being efficient for air-
condiEoned spaces
•  AdapEve comfort model for occupant-controlled
naturally condiEoned spaces during “changeover”
mixed-mode operaEons Thermal comfort analyses using adapEve and Fanger comfort models
•  Flexible setpoint with wider band of acceptance
26-32C
•  Allows system size reducGon and turndown with
lower chiller lie (capex and opex opportunity)


Process

META-ANALYSIS 2:
NIGHT FLUSH POTENTIAL
•  Hours in a day to months in a year that allow system
shut down (opex opportunity)

Night flush potenEal 33
 STUDY OF PROBLEM AREAS
AND SOLUTIONS


Annual solar energy transmiqed to a verEcal surface by orientaEon (Jaipur)
META-ANALYSIS 3: ANALYSIS OF SOLAR
LOADS THROUGH WINDOWS)
•  OrientaGon-wise external thermal loads management
opportuniGes, e.g. opGmize glazing vs. shading design
(Capex opportunity)


Analysis of solar loads through windows by orientaEon

META-ANALYSIS 4: ANALYSIS OF INTERNAL

THERMAL LOADS (LIGHTS, PLUGS)

Process

•  Important, climate-independent strategies for lighGng

and plug load reducGon: cut EPI by 40% even in a BAU
building
•  Daylight sensing and controls has a significant ROI

Analysis of internal thermal loads. ProporEon of lighEng and plug loads in energy
demand (le{) and heat gains (right)
34
 Baselines: BAU and ECBC

City Bangalore Jaipur Mumbai New Delhi

Climate Temperate Hot & Dry Warm & Composite
Humid
Model Name BAU ECBC BAU ECBC BAU ECBC BAU ECBC
Process: Baselines

EPI [kWh/m²] 232 125 280 146 253 144 268 146
Savings 46% 48% 43% 46%
Uncomfortable hours (Ratio of Total Occupied Time) (%)
West 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
North 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
East 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
South 1 0 2 1 4 1 2 1
Core 4 0 5 1 7 1 5 1

 Baselines: BAU and ECBC
5158
4664 4885
4287
Process: Baselines

2625 2502 2553

2319

-626 -392
-760 -843 -670
-1397 -1238 -1284

Bangalore Jaipur Mumbai New Delhi

Gains Losses Gains Losses
 Baselines: BAU and ECBC
21
19
Energy Consumption [kWh/m²]
250 40
9
9 40 40
EPI
200 40 32
32
savings: 32
Process: Baselines

32
46% 48% 43% 46%
150 3 0 5
105
0 37 89 37 99 37
37
100 95
32 32 32
32
32 28 31
50 28 82 82 78
56 46
42 41
28
0
BAU ECBC BAU ECBC BAU ECBC BAU ECBC
Bangalore Jaipur Mumbai New Delhi
Cooling Fans Lights Plug Loads Heating
Part 4: Deep-dive into
best practice strategies
38
 BEST PRACTICES


1.  WHOLE BUILDING
2.  BUILDING PHYSICAL SYSTEMS
  IMPROVE ENVELOPE AND PASSIVE DESIGN
DD: Best PracGces

  REDUCE PLUG AND PROCESS LOADS

  OPTIMIZE LIGHTING DESIGN
  DEVELOP LOW-ENERGY HVAC
  IMPLEMENT CLIMATE CONTROLS
3.  BUILDING INFORMATION SYSTEMS
  INSTALL ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND INFORMATION
SYSTEMS

39
DD: Whole Building Metrics
DD: Envelope & Passive Design Decrease Solar Heat Gain
www.pbc.net
Climate: Composite
Operations: Owner-occupied
Strategy: Cool envelope surface materials
Benefit: 5-10% AC load reduction on top floor
Climate: Warm-Humid
Operations: Owner-occupied
Strategy: Vegetated roof
Benefit: 10 degree reduction in surface temp; 5-10%
AC load reduction; decreased peak, retrofit system size
41
DD: Envelope & Passive Design
Optimize fenestration: Window to wall(WWR) ratio & shading

2648 Annual Solar Energy [GJ]

~80% reducEon

~20% reducEon
492
387

No Shadings No Shadings With Shadings

Overall 80% Window 40% Window North
30% Window South

Climate: Composite
Operations: Owner-occupied
Strategy: WWR 40% (N), 30% (S); clever orientation +shading
Benefit:
•  7%–10% whole-building energy reduction from ECBC
•  ~For a medium-sized office building, implies energy savings of 65–90
MWh,; opex savings INR 4.5–6.3 Lakh per year
42
DD: Envelope & Passive Design
Maximize Daylight Autonomy Without Glare

Pic: AB Lall Architects Pic: AB Lall Architects

Climate: Composite
Operations: Owner-Occupied
Strategy: Daylight autonomy without glare or thermal load gain
Benefit:
•  Narrow floor plate allows WWR 15-26%, cuts thermal heat
gain and capex
•  Enhances visual-thermal comfort

43
DD: Envelope & Passive Design
Orientation studies

Courtesy: AB Lall Architects 44

 North-East
18.7Meters WWR= 26%

South-West
WWR = 16.75%
5.7 Meters 12.5 Meters
(Internal Courtyard) North-East
WWR= 16.5%
South-West
WWR =
24.86%

South-East= 6%
N 45
Courtesy: AB Lall Architects
 North-East
18.7Meters WWR= 26%

South-West
WWR = 16.75%
5.7 Meters 12.5 Meters
(Internal Courtyard) North-East
WWR= 16.5%
South-West
WWR =
24.86%

South-East= 6%
N 46
Courtesy: AB Lall Architects
Results: Envelope Strategies
Maximize Daylight Autonomy Without Glare

Courtesy: Suzlon

Climate: Temperate
Operations: Owner-Occupied
Strategy: Daylight autonomy without glare or thermal
load gain, through shading by building mass and
extensive louvers
Benefit:
•  Capex optimized though specific targeted use of
low-E glass
•  Enhanced visual-thermal comfort

47

Results: Envelope Strategies
Maximize Daylight Autonomy Without Glare
Climate: Hot-dry
Operations: Owner-Occupied
Strategy: Daylight autonomy without glare or thermal load gain,
using optimized WWR (20-30%), lightshelves, vertical sectioning of
fenestration, narrow floorplate)
Benefit:
•  Brighter light enters at higher wall levels and gains deeper
penetration, without adding glare at the lower vision-level work
planes

Courtesy: Infosys Green IniEaEves Team 48

Results: Envelope Strategies

49
Results: Internal Load Strategies
Plug and Lighting loads
900
800
Power density
Annual Heat Gains [GJ]

700
600 Before After
reduction by 55%
500
400
733 767 provides
300 583

200 432 429

100
313 304
149
HVAC consumption
0 reduction by 44%
People External Light Plug Loads
Plug load [W/

8.0
m²]

~3:1 peak to base raEo

4.0

0.0
00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00
50
Results: Internal Load Strategies

Courtesy: Sears Pune Team

Courtesy: Suzlon
Courtesy: ITC

An envelope promoting natural, glare- Implement a highly efficient equipment and Provide lighting sensors & controls
free daylight is a critical ECM lighting layout

 4.0
ConvenEonal side
Plug and Lighting loads

LighGng power Density [ W/m²]

Radiant side
2.0
35 32
Light ConsumpEon [kWh/m²]

30
Results: Internal Loads

25
20 16 0.0
00:00 02:00 04:00 06:00 08:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00
15
10 6

LighGng power Density [W/

5 1.2 1 Installed LighEng Capacity
0 OperaEng LighEng Load
No Daylight No Daylight With Daylight Sensors 0.8

m²]
0.45 0.45
LPD: 10 W/m² LPD: 5 W/m²
0.4 0.17

0
Climate: Hot-dry Average 2007 levels SDB-1 HYD
Operations: Owner-Occupied
Strategy: Daylighting to reduce lighting power density
reduced to 5 W/m2
Benefit:
•  55% whole-building savings in lighting
consumption
•  provision of daylighting sensors reduced the
Courtesy: Infosys
remaining consumption by half
•  Artificially lit hours contained to a narrow evening
band ( opex savings)
52

Results: Plug, lighGng metrics
Plug and Lighting loads

•  Set aggressive power management settings

•  Optimize daylighting design
•  Provide a computing infrastructure
•  Implement efficient equipment and layout
•  Pursue direct current based improvements
•  Provide lighting sensors and controls
•  Install hardware solutions such as smart
power strips that monitor and control the
loads intelligently
•  Encourage responsible occupant behavior

53

 HVAC: Case studies and best practices
•  Right-size the equipment, and build in modularity

•  Consider low-energy cooling options

o  Split air conditioning systems
o  Displacement Ventilation
o  Underfloor Air Distribution
Results: HVAC

o  Radiant Cooling
o  Active Chilled Beam System
o  Evaporative Cooling Systems

•  Provide thermal storage options

•  Consider progressive and hybrid systems
•  Implement component-level strategies
54
 HVAC: Case studies and best practices

Courtesy: Infosys
Results: HVAC

Climate: Hot-dry
Operations: Owner-Occupied
Strategy: Radiant cooling with ceiling fans
Benefit:
•  Medium temperature chillers with lower “lift” requirement optimizes system first cost cost,
despite the separation of ducts for DOAS and pipes for chilled water
•  Radiant system provides cooling at ~700 W/m2, compared to VAV at~ 1500 W/m2
•  Gentler, more comfortable, draft-free cooling
•  50-60% better performance from baseline ( ECBC). 55
 HVAC: Case studies and best practices
Courtesy: Infosys, Pune
Results: HVAC

Climate: Temperate
Operations: Owner-Occupied
Strategy: Chilled beams with ceiling fans
Benefit:
•  Medium temperature chillers with lower “lift” requirement, and hence lower opex
•  Gentler, more comfortable, draft-free cooling
•  Prefab unit
•  The HVAC annual energy consumption is ~37 kWh/m2/yr. Normalized per occupant 56
consumption is 844 kWh/full-time equivalent (FTE)/year.
 HVAC: Case studies and best practices
Courtesy: Infosys, Pune
Results: HVAC

Climate: Warm humid

Operations: Tenanted
Strategy: District cooling exploiting loads diversity, and thermal energy storage
Benefits:
•  The use of TES has reduced the initial peak load requirement by 2 chillers, and it provides a
four-hour HVAC backup
•  Exploits differential tariffs to save opex
•  Campus tenants receive power savings benefits

57
 HVAC: Exploiting the Diversity
Results: HVAC

Climate: Moderate
Operations: Tenanted
Strategy: Multiple HVAC types exploiting diversity : Under floor air distribution for offices, VAV
for gym, packaged units for server room; thermal stratification tank.
Benefits:
•  Chilled water produced at off peak hours provides opex benefit
•  Exploits differential tariffs to save opex
•  Just in time, and just right air conditioning with a diversity of schedules
58
 HVAC: Exploiting the Diversity
Results: HVAC

Climate: Composite
Operations: Owner occupied
Strategy: Multiple HVAC types exploiting diversity : Under floor air
distribution for auditorium, radiant for offices with ceiling fans, VRF
for guest houses

Benefits:
•  16 deg C medium temperature water has significant
Typical office module: Minimal false ceilings are installed operational benefits
to house HVAC and fresh air ducts which supply into •  Extremely comfortable AC spaces
cabins through openings designed into structural beams 59
 HVAC: A Healthier System
Dedicated Outdoor Air System, DOAS - 100% Fresh Air: no
recirculation of air for cooling

• Improved indoor air quality

• Increases productivity and mental agility

Results: HVAC

• Increased moisture control and oxygen infusion

• Decrease IAQ related health risks from exposure

to indoor pollutants

• Reduce environmental triggers of asthma

60
 HVAC: Strategies
Results: HVAC

61
 50
Results: Modeling results
Pumps
Fans
Energy Consumption [kWh/m²]
9 8 9
Cooling
38

20 16
20
25 6
5
5 5

14 10
8 9
13
5 22
19 18
6 10 11 10
8
3
0
VAV RADIANT VAV RADIANT VAV RADIANT VAV RADIANT
TEMPERATE HOT & DRY WARM & COMPOSITE
HUMID 62
Results: HVAC metrics

63
 •  Integrate fully or partially naturally ventilated and mixed-mode cooling
•  Educated choice of sensor type and location
•  Demand controlled ventilation
Results: Climate Controls
•  Monitor and control operable shadings and windows
•  Simple rule-based control: Night setback , night ventilation, economizer
•  Adopt a flexible setpoint and lifestyle changes

64
Results: Energy InformaGon Systems

65
Results: Energy InformaGon Systems
EIS Visualization
Facility Daily Dashboard: Building Pulse at a Glance
How much energy (by fuel) and cost is my building consuming, where and when?

1. Energy Use Area Chart 2. Power Demand Trendlines 3. Fuel Cost and ConsumpEon

Showing daily energy consumpEon for electricity Showing hourly power demand to expose daily Showing a quick look of the building performance
or gas trends of electrical or gas consumpEon over a day/week

66
Results: Energy InformaGon Systems EIS Visualization
Monthly/Annual Dashboard
1. Annual Consumption 2. Annual Cost Trends 3. Average Hourly Loads

4. Monthly Energy Use 5. Cross-sec. Benchmarking 6. Whole Building Heat Map

Executive level charts Facility manager 67

Results: Energy InformaGon Systems
EIS enbales data-driven action

Building automation system

Energy data-driven insights for all through energy information system,

and provision of feedback loops to the BAS (ideally)

68
Results: Energy InformaGon Systems

69
Part 5: Conclusions

70
 Primary drivers and stakeholders
Conclusions

71
 8 Key Metrics
Environmental Metrics
1. Whole-building and systems energy use [kWh/m2/ year]
2. Annual energy use per occupant [kWh/ year / person]
3. Whole-building and systems peak load [W/m2]
4. HVAC plant efficiency [kW/TR]
5. Cooling load efficiency [m2/TR]

Financial Metrics
6. Cost [INR/sqft]
7. Payback period [years]
Conclusions

Comfort Metrics
8. Ratio of uncomfortable hours to total occupied hours

72
Conclusions A MoScoW matrix for prioritization of strategies

73
Conclusions: Design, build, operate

74
Conclusions: Procure

75
76
DEMOCRATIZE, DIGITIZE, DECARBONIZE
High-Performance, Smart, Energy-Efficient Buildings

“BIG” DOWNLOAD:
BIT.LY/BUILDINGINNOVATIONGUIDE

Questions?
GReshmaSingh@Gmail.com

77