901 TSD Energy Credits PNNL 32516
901 TSD Energy Credits PNNL 32516
901 TSD Energy Credits PNNL 32516
R Hart
J McNeill
M Tillou
E Franconi
C Cejudo
C Nambiar
H Nagda
D Maddox
J Lerond
M Rosenberg
Choose an item.
DISCLAIMER
Choose an item.
PNNL- 32516
January 2022
R Hart
J McNeill
M Tillou
E Franconi
C Cejudo
C Nambiar
H Nagda
D Maddox
J Lerond
M Rosenberg
Prepared for
the U.S. Department of Energy
under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830
Executive Summary
The Standing Standards Project Committee (SSPC) for ASHRAE Standard 90.1 established a
working group to develop an energy credits proposal. Energy credits provide for additional
required prescriptive savings that are more flexible than base prescriptive requirements. The
package of measures proposed for ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2022 includes 32 energy efficiency,
renewable energy, and load management measures available. Building-type-specific targets
were developed with a goal of 5% total building energy cost savings.
Energy credits have been adopted in other model building energy codes. For example, in the
2021 International Energy Conservation Code, energy credit measures were expanded from
selecting 1 of 8 alternate options to 15 available energy saving measures that can be flexibly
selected to achieve a 5% level of energy savings. The contribution of different measure types to
a cost-effective package of measures is shown in Figure E-1.
This technical document provides the general description of the proposed energy credit
measures, the basis for calculation of potential energy credits, and the demonstration cost
effective packages that justify the energy credit requirements by building type and climate zone.
The actual code language, credit requirements, and available credits by measure can be found
in addendum ap to 90.1-2019 and are not included here due to copyright issues.
Executive Summary ii
PNNL- 32516
Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... ii
1.0 Energy Credit Concept ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Overall Summary ................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Benefits of Energy Credits ...................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Energy Credit Development .................................................................... 2
1.1.3 Cost Effectiveness Considerations ......................................................... 2
1.2 Energy Credit Adoption Principles ......................................................................... 2
1.2.1 Energy Credit Measures Provide Incremental Annual Savings .............. 3
1.2.2 Credit Points Are Unique by Building Type and Climate Zone ............... 4
1.2.3 Measure Credits Have Approximate Energy Savings
Equivalency ............................................................................................ 4
1.2.4 Measures Do Not Require Customized Performance Analysis .............. 5
1.2.5 Integrate Energy Credits with Discipline Performance Methods ............. 6
1.2.6 Energy Credit Requirements Based on Cost Effective
Demonstration ........................................................................................ 6
1.2.7 Ensure a Portion of Credits Come from Energy Efficiency ..................... 7
1.2.8 Required Energy Credits in the Performance Paths ............................... 7
1.2.9 Review Future Energy Credit Measures Based on Criteria .................... 8
1.3 Requirement Package ........................................................................................... 9
1.3.1 Base Demonstration Package ................................................................ 9
1.3.2 Demonstration Cost Effectiveness.......................................................... 9
1.3.3 Requirements vs. Potential Savings ....................................................... 9
1.3.4 Renewable Credit Adjustments ............................................................ 11
1.4 Technical Considerations .................................................................................... 11
1.5 Energy Credit Development ................................................................................ 14
1.5.1 Energy Efficiency Measures ................................................................. 14
1.5.2 Renewable and Load Management Credit Measures .......................... 15
1.6 Savings from Efficiency Measures ...................................................................... 16
1.6.1 Energy Credit Metric ............................................................................. 16
2.0 Energy Savings and Cost Effectiveness ......................................................................... 17
2.1 Energy Savings Analysis ..................................................................................... 17
2.2 Cost Effectiveness Considerations ...................................................................... 17
2.2.1 Methodology ......................................................................................... 17
2.2.2 Cost Effective Energy Efficiency Demonstration Packages .................. 19
3.0 Energy Efficiency, Renewable Energy, and Load Management Credit Measures .......... 24
3.1 Measure Applicability .......................................................................................... 24
3.2 Building Envelope ................................................................................................ 25
3.2.1 E01: Envelope Performance (90.1 Appendix C) ................................... 25
Contents iii
PNNL- 32516
Contents iv
PNNL- 32516
Figures
Figure 1. Potential Energy Credit Points by Building and Measure Type ................................... 10
Figure 2. Potential Energy Credit Points by Climate and Building Type ..................................... 10
Figure 3. Range of Credit Points for a Sample of Measures for Office Buildings ....................... 12
Figure 4. Range of Credit Points for a Sample of Measures for Multifamily Buildings ................ 13
Figure 5. Scalar Ratio Limits Based on Measure Life ................................................................. 19
Figure 6. Cost effective Demonstration Package Credits by Measure Type............................... 22
Figure 7. LPD: 90.1 BAM vs. Field Study in Washington State vs. L06 Credits ......................... 35
Tables
Table 1. Energy Efficiency Credit Measures ............................................................................... 15
Table 2. Scalar Ratio Method Economic Parameters and Scalar Ratio Limit ............................. 18
Table 3. Matrix of Base Demonstration Package Efficiency Measures....................................... 21
Table 4. Scalar Ratios for Base Demonstration Package Efficiency Measures by Climate
Zone and Building Type ...................................................................................... 21
Table 5. Matrix of Alternate Demonstration Package Efficiency Measures ................................ 23
Table 6. Energy Credit Measure Applicability ............................................................................. 24
Figures v
PNNL- 32516
In the 2021 IECC, energy credit measures were expanded from 8 alternate options to
15 measures that can be flexibly selected to achieve a 2.5% level of building energy cost
savings. This document supports a proposal for a similar package of measures proposed for
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2022 through addendum ap, with 32 energy efficiency, renewable
energy, and load management measures available. Building-type-specific targets were
developed with a goal of 5% total energy cost savings.
This technical brief includes 24 energy efficiency measures, 1 renewable measure, and 7 load
management measures. It builds on the former energy credit approaches with a base goal of
around 5% energy savings. The energy efficiency credits in the proposal are based on site
energy cost and each credit represents 1/10 of 1% of total building energy cost savings. Load
Management measures base cost savings on grid cost impact represented by a time-of-use
electric price structure that has been adopted by SSPC 90.1 for evaluation of similar measures.
The Code Approach is to add a prescriptive requirement for additional saving measures that can
be selected by design teams to meet the requirements for each building use type and climate
zone.
Energy codes include mandatory requirements that all buildings must fulfill prescriptive
requirements that can be used without following a performance path, and discipline 1 or whole-
building performance paths where equivalent energy performance to the prescriptive path is
demonstrated. To fit into the existing code structure, additional energy credits constitute a new
prescriptive requirement; however, instead of all measures being required, the building designer
can select from various options to achieve a defined level of energy performance. To maintain
1An example of a discipline performance path is the Building Envelope Trade-Off Compliance Path in the
envelope discipline of Standard 90.1 that is supported by Appendix C. There are current proposals under
public review in Standard 90.1 for discipline performance paths for both lighting and HVAC disciplines.
equivalent energy impact, whole-building performance paths must be adjusted to reflect the
impact of the required efficiency energy credits. These issues are addressed in the proposed
code language through modifications to Section 11 and a process for modifying Building
Performance Factors for Appendix G.
Energy credits have been developed from typical measures used in green building programs,
new construction utility incentive programs, and Advanced Energy Design Guidelines (ASHRAE
2019b). More detail is included in Section 1.4.
While baseline prescriptive requirements usually undergo individual review for cost
effectiveness, the approach for energy credit measures is different. Each measure can be
selected for a particular building; however, not all measures are required. Thus, the approach to
establish cost effectiveness is to demonstrate that at least one package of measures is cost
effective using the ASHRAE 90.1 scalar method. More detail is included in Section 2.2.
• Energy credit measures provide energy cost savings related to prescriptive requirements
and general practice
• Establish energy credits for different building types and climate zones based on
prototype analysis and end-use proration; allow for non-simulated building types as well
as additions and alterations
• Determine credits for measures that are based on approximate energy cost savings
equivalency
• Use measure descriptions that are based on prescriptive descriptions and do not require
performance analysis
1Originally Section C406 appeared in the 2012 IECC as a “select one of 3” options approach. It has
evolved over the years to including 6 options in 2015, 8 options in 2018, and finally assigned points to
multiple measures with a 10 point (2.5% cost savings) requirement in 2021. See Section 1.4 for a more
complete history.
• Where possible, integrate energy credits with discipline trade-off or performance paths
such as the envelope tradeoff, HVAC performance, or lighting performance methods.
• Establish energy credit requirements by building type and climate zone based on a cost
effective demonstration package(s) of reasonably applicable measures
• Limit the share of credits from renewables and load management to ensure a balanced
portion of credits from energy efficiency
• Ensure that required energy credits are accounted for in the performance paths
• Review future measures for addition to the measure energy credits based on these
criteria
The most important quality that energy credit measures have is that they provide incremental
savings above the prescriptive path and standard practice in building construction. Although
savings occur, measures in the energy credit category do not necessarily fit most building
conditions, otherwise they would likely be incorporated in the prescriptive path. One wrinkle with
this concept is that Standard 90.1 undergoes continuous maintenance. This has two
considerations:
• It is desirable to update the energy credits for each edition based on changes to the
prescriptive path. While there is no mandate to require this, it can be incorporated into
the committee work plan and supported by DOE funding for analysis.
• It is not always possible to include every proposal in the baseline since they are moving
on parallel public comment paths. Just as updating the Appendix G BPFs has a similar
issue, the best that can be done is to estimate likely changes to the prescriptive path at
the time any update to credits available and credit requirements is made.
Using percentage improvements in the credit language mitigates some of the issue related to
parallel proposals.
• For example, the credits are based on a percentage improvement of cooling efficiency
above the minimum efficiency, if the minimum efficiency changes for a particular edition,
there is an automatic adjustment in the credits achieved for cooling equipment relative to
code minimums. While this is not perfect, it goes a long way toward keeping the credits
in line with actual savings related to changing prescriptive requirements.
• Incorporating discipline performance methods like the envelope tradeoff, HVAC Total
System Performance Ratio (TSPR), and lighting performance provide similar
adjustment, as these methods will be based on the prescriptive baselines or targets in
their respective disciplines. Only the envelope tradeoff exists in 90.1-2019; the others
are in the adoption process.
1.2.2 Credit Points Are Unique by Building Type and Climate Zone
A review of measure results for the 2021 IECC found that there was wide climate zone variation
for many measures, as seen in Figure 3 and Figure 4. There were also perceived applicability
issues to certain building types. For example, retail building service hot water loads are
generally low and central water heating with recirculation is not typical. Since what are
essentially “point of use” water heaters are typical in retail, savings for this measure is not
allowed for energy credits in this building type. Other measures have very small savings results
in some climate zones, so where the total building savings for heating falls below 0.05% in a
climate zone, the measure is excluded.
Measure savings and credits are determined based primarily on prototype simulation. In
addition end use results from one prototype can be prorated to other building types based on
end use building type energy use. More information on the analytical method of establishing
credits can be found in Section 2.1.
While Standard 90.1 does not have a set of clearly defined building types and does not refer to
uniform building code use groups, there is a set of building type names that have been used for
the building performance factors in Appendix G. The energy credits are aligned with the same
building use types. There is also an “other building” category since all building use types are not
covered. To accommodate these buildings, the credits achieved are averaged from the
simulated building prototypes and requirements for the “other” buildings are also based on an
average that is then reduced (currently by half) since the “other” buildings often have fewer
energy saving options. In addition to establishing building use types, the energy credit code
language accommodates the following:
• Mixed use buildings can be separated into their uses to establish a weighted energy
credit requirement and then the individual building use type credits can be weighted to
determine if requirements have been met.
• Minimum floor area thresholds can be established for new buildings, additions, and two
types of alterations:
o Substantial alterations involve the major remodel of a building rather than just
completing some minor replacements. Two of three major systems—lighting,
HVAC, or building envelope—must be substantially replaced.
o Rules need to accommodate core and shell construction and later initial build out
of tenant spaces and how the credits are shared together (or not in some cases).
The basic concept of the energy credits is to assign points to measures that reflect approximate
relative savings for the measure in the building type and climate zone. After discussion, the
working group arrived at the following guidelines:
• The credit points are based on a percentage of total building savings. Alternatives
discussed included a flat energy savings quantity by building type.
• The credit points are based on energy cost savings using approved 90.1 annual average
energy prices. Alternatives included site Btu’s, source Btu’s and emissions. Load
management credits are based on time of use energy cost savings using the approved
90.1 time of use pricing, and do not always save energy.
• The credit points are based on first year savings. Alternatives included adjusting points
for either measure life or persistence. The working group overall thought that those
adjustments would add too much complication to the development of credit points.
• Energy credits are set at 1 point equal to 0.1% total building savings. 1 This level was
thought to be enough credits to notice, while fine enough to distinguish between
measures, climate zones, and building types. The choice of 0.1% also allowed an easy
gage of percent building savings for measures with a simple decimal point shift. Note
that this is different from the 2021 IECC at 0.25% per point, although a proposal for the
2024 IECC suggests a shift to 0.10% per point.
• Where measures have proration adjustments, the points for each measure are rounded
to the nearest whole number, or 0.1% annual savings.
• Since energy credit points are based on prototype building analysis rather than custom
building analysis, results are necessarily somewhat approximate. The desire in
establishing points is that there be rough energy equivalency between measures.
The basic idea behind energy credits is to keep it simple, allowing a designer to simply select
measures from a list and add up the points to meet or exceed the requirement for that building.
There are some cases where simple proration of measure points is used, but these are simple
linear adjustments, not sophisticated regression-based approaches, although those approaches
could be used for some measures in the future. One exception to this simplified approach is
integration with discipline based simplified performance approaches that are discussed later.
Overall, thinking about point development ran along these lines:
• Interaction between measures is not accounted for. For this initial roll out of energy
credits in 90.1, the credit requirements are capped at 5% of building cost savings, so the
impact of interaction is not expected to be high.
• The basis of savings is prototypical analysis. Measures are evaluated in the context of
prototype building models established for the 90.1 progress indicator by PNNL. Most
measures can be evaluated in this context; however, for some measures—especially
service water heating—separate engineering calculations are more appropriate.
1 The percentage of cost savings is based on total building energy use, not just regulated loads. This
simplifies the analysis. This percentage approach results in credits being worth more in lower energy cost
buildings and less in higher energy cost buildings. The background concept is that high energy use
buildings should devote more attention to energy savings, whether the higher energy use is a result of
building use type or climate zone.
While measures are generally prescriptive with prototypical non-interactive savings used to
establish credits, in some cases a simplified discipline-centric trade off or performance method
is established. Where these are available, it is helpful to integrate them into the energy credits.
• For envelope, the building envelope trade-off compliance path (Appendix C of 90.1) has
been established for several code cycles. The results of this simplified analysis—that is
integrated into COMcheck—can be easily converted to total building savings and energy
credits. This allows full interactive savings analysis of envelope measures to be
completed in one calculation and provides more accuracy than creating many envelope
component measures. The Appendix C method has been recently updated to include air
leakage impacts and wall reflectivity.
• For HVAC, there is a performance method based on total system performance ratio that
is currently undergoing public review. Once adopted, this method can be added as an
alternative performance approach for HVAC energy credits; however, it is not part of
Addendum ap.
• For lighting, there is a performance method based on the interaction of lighting power
and controls that is currently undergoing public review. Once adopted, this method can
be added as an alternative performance approach for lighting energy credits, and
possibly replace some of the initial lighting measures. Since it is not yet adopted, this
method it is not part of Addendum ap.
For each building type, energy credit requirements can be set based on cost effectiveness of a
selected package of demonstration measures for the building as a whole. This selected
package should include a reasonable selection of measures that can be broadly applied. In
some cases, it may be appropriate to review multiple packages for building types that have
different system approaches regionally, for example central hot water heating vs. one water
heater per apartment. The working group agreed that there was not a requirement that
individual measures be cost effective, as the 90.1 cost effectiveness approach is based solely
on energy savings and does not consider non-energy benefits such as improved comfort,
improved occupant control, or property management benefits of green marketing. Some
measures provide these other benefits, even though the strict cost effectiveness analysis based
only on energy savings may not find them to be cost effective using 90.1 methods. As long as
requirements for energy credits are set based on a reasonable cost-effective package, then
designers can choose other measures based on their own building development criteria.
One situation that is included in the initial proposal, is a renewable energy adjustment where
needed. This is because it is reasonable to include renewable energy in the demonstration
packages at a level that can be applied to most buildings, based on rooftop PV panels.
However, some buildings are located in parts of the country where insolation is quite low or
have limited roof space available. Where these conditions occur, provisions are made to reduce
required credits based on the level of renewables included in the demonstration package
relative to total credits. The approach to this reduction is as follows:
• Set up a table of renewable adjustment credits that would apply if the building met one of
the exceptions in Section 10. Always allow a minimum adjustment based on half the
renewable credits for 0.1 W/sq ft or 20 credits, whichever is less. Base those adjustment
credits on the credits included for renewable in each building’s cost effective package as
follows:
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅0.1
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 �𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 �20, � , 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 − (𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 − 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 )�
2
Where:
ECR0.1 = Renewable points for 0.1 W/sq ft installed in each building type
ECCE = The total credits used in the cost effective package for the building type (this
may be greater than ECCAP)
• The renewable adjustment points for each building type and climate zone are included in
the adjustment table, with a formula to make adjustments based on available roof area
as shown in the proposal.
As renewable energy has been added to the 90.1 standard, there have been limits placed on
offsetting energy efficiency in the performance path with renewable energy. In addition, the
energy credit options include load management measures that make sense for a building owner
in a region that has peak use pricing. These measures do not always save energy directly, but
they reduce the building owner’s energy cost and provide for a more efficient grid.
As initially proposed, the energy credits would limit the credits achieved through load
management and renewables to 60% of the required total, so that a substantial base of the
credits promotes direct energy use reduction.
There are two different performance paths in 90.1: Chapter 11 and Appendix G. Since the
general approach of determining compliance is different, each path requires a different
approach to incorporating savings for energy credits:
this process, the difference between regulated and unregulated loads needs to be
considered, as that is part of the Appendix G performance target.
• In Chapter 11 the inclusion is also straightforward. The energy cost budget is based on a
building that meets prescriptive requirements. There is already a formula that adjusts the
energy cost budget for additions and alterations. Addendum ap proposes modification of
this formula to include the added required savings from energy credits.
Any future additions or adjustments to the energy credits allowed or their descriptions will go
through the standard ASHRAE 90.1 process, either with an external CMP or an internally
generated proposal. This maintains the integrity of the standards process. In evaluating future
measure proposals, it is suggested that committee members rely on the following criteria.
• The measure broadly applies to multiple equipment types and is not a niche product
from one manufacturer
• Review measures for “free ridership” where many projects use the credit and the
measure is really just standard practice.
o One goal of energy credits is “market transformation”, making less used methods
the norm. Oregon’s residential “options” led to early market transformation: 6”
studs and R-21 insulation became the norm long before model codes required
this for our climate zones.
o Should a credit be moved to the mandatory or prescriptive sections if it has wide
adoption.
o Does overall EC scalar get re-reviewed if an item is moved to the body of the
standard?
It is recommended that ongoing or edition cycle review of addenda to 90.1 for the impact on
credits be established in the workplan. This could require several items:
• Include in standard work a check with the energy credits section and adjustment there if
an addendum raises the base prescriptive requirements and dilutes the value of a
particular credit.
• Either establish an ongoing working group or assign energy credit review to an existing
subcommittee (ECB may be a candidate). At least once per 90.1 edition, review pending
addenda to find:
o Any addendum that could reduce (or increase) the effectiveness/number of
points of a credit measure
o An addendum could either be in conflict with a credit or make a credit moot
o Impact of an addendum on the credit list would need to be reviewed
• If there are significant credit changes within an edition cycle, consider re-evaluating the
demonstration packages for cost effectiveness.
The base demonstration package is selected with a goal of 5% total building energy savings.
For some buildings or climate zones, this goal is not always practical, and then the requirement
is lower. For buildings with higher energy use, since the goal is a percentage of total building
energy use, the result may be a smaller energy credit available for the same measure
application and a similar absolute energy savings. Consequently, the credit requirement, based
on percentage of building savings, may be smaller in high energy use buildings—typically those
in hot and cold climates.
The demonstration package has savings that vary from 3.8% to 12.4% of total building energy
cost across building types and climate zones. The “other” building is excluded from this
analysis, as they require only half of the average building credits from designated building use
types and can be highly varied.
The requirements based on the demonstration package can be compared to the potential
savings from identified measures. For this comparison, mutually exclusive and niche measures
were not included. Figure 1 shows the credits that can be achieved with identified measures and
illustrates the availability of a range of measure choices to meet a 5% building cost savings
requirement. The figure also demonstrates that measures are available for a variety of end
uses, so the energy credits do not rely on just one end use to achieve the required credits.
Figure 2 shows the same potential savings organized by climate, with a “Warm” group including
Climate Zones 0 to 2, a “moderate” group including Climate Zones 3 to 5, and a “Cold” group
including Climate Zones 6 to 8. This illustrates that adequate credits are available in all climates
to meet the requirement.
Renewable credits in the second public review were made more uniform at 0.1 W/ft2. In most
cases this is easily achievable, and the portion of credits by building use group can be seen in
Figure 1. In some cases, due to low insolation in a particular area of the country or for a high
rise building, there is not the same potential for on-site renewable. In this case, there is a
reduction in required credits allowed. This adjustment is based on the following factors:
2. The deduction is first established based on the total points in the demonstration cost-
effective package—that may exceed the 50 credit cap—less the assumed on-site
renewable amount. In some cases this deduction was zero where the possible
demonstration credits less the renewable credits included was greater than the 50 credit
cap.
3. Then, when greater than a renewable deduction estimated in step 2, at least half the
demonstration on-site renewable is allowed as a deduction if renewables are not
applicable for a particular building.
Currently 90.1 does not employ energy credit measures. In the 2021 IECC, points for the
additional energy efficiency measures are assigned by building type and climate zone rather
than all having the same requirements, as is done in the 2018 IECC (ICC 2018). Sufficient
measures must be included in the building design until at least 10 points are achieved. This
increases building savings by about 2.5% of total building energy cost compared with the base
prescriptive path requirements.
Addendum ap adds energy credit measures to 90.1 in a similar manner to the 2021 IECC and
distinguishes requirements based on building type and climate zone. The energy credit points
attributed to individual measures are determined from building simulation prototype analysis.
The assigned points for each measure are based on relatively equivalent energy savings. Here
the measure credits are based on energy cost savings. Each efficiency measure credit equals
0.1% of total building energy cost based either on average national energy prices or a
composite time of use electric price schedule. For example, a score of 10 credits represents a
1% energy cost reduction for the building as a whole and a score of 50 credits represents a 5%
reduction.
The extra efficiency credit approach provides compliance flexibility to designers and builders.
The approach does require selecting multiple items and adding up points; however, in many
cases, credit can be earned for measures that are often included in buildings but not previously
accounted for in prescriptive compliance. Expanding the number of measures available for
achieving credits makes it possible for buildings to save more, allowing the credit requirements
to be set initially at about 5% savings.
In Figure 3, the credits for selected measures in an office building are plotted so the range of
energy savings and resulting credit points for selected measures across climate zones can be
seen. The credits in addendum ap are based on 1 energy credit point representing 0.1%
savings of total building energy cost, so 10 credits equal 1.0% energy cost savings. Here the y-
axis point values are based on site Btu energy savings, but the representation of measure
spread and relation is close. The determination of credits is based on prototype building
analysis in the specified climate zone as described in Section 2.0. Figure 4 shows similar results
for a multifamily building.
Figure 3. Range of Credit Points for a Sample of Measures for Office Buildings
The measure savings by climate zone has a wide range, especially for building envelope
measures. The spread is also broad for lighting reduction, as the reduced lighting heat load
must be made up by the heating system in colder climates, while in warmer climates there is
added savings in the cooling system. Service hot water (SHW) measures are impacted by
different average incoming cold water temperatures. For multifamily buildings, SHW measures
provide significant energy credit opportunities. The spread by climate for other measures like
service water heating system recirculation is small. Overall the wide spread for many measures
indicates that separate credits by climate zone should be provided.
Figure 4. Range of Credit Points for a Sample of Measures for Multifamily Buildings
To achieve deeper savings in response to energy and carbon reduction policy goals, energy
credits provide a more expedient compliance path than the performance path, which requires
developing a custom building model. By expanding the number and flexibility of options for
achieving energy credits and differentiating credits by building type, additional savings can be
achieved with a simplified approach. To streamline its implementation and review, the energy
credit measures included in the COMcheck program for the 2021 IECC can be expanded to
include the 90.1 measures introduced in Addendum aq. While there is some additional review
required for the building official, it is less complex than the review typically required for a whole
building model.
Are there existing codes and standards that take a similar approach?
The outlined approach is a simple expansion of the structure currently employed in the 2021
IECC for commercial buildings, which has been adopted by several states. The credits
approach has been used in the Washington State Energy Code since the 2015 edition, with
good results (WSBCC 2015). The approach is also similar to packages of measures used in
both residential and commercial energy codes, particularly in the Pacific Northwest. The
Washington State and Seattle energy codes have successfully used the approach to address
and balance multiple project considerations, including energy performance, design flexibility,
and evolving technologies.
• Energy efficiency measures that directly reduce the energy use of a building through
reduced loads, improved efficiency, improved system configuration, or improved
controls.
• Renewable energy measures that reduce the energy impact of the building through local
waste heat recovery or energy generation, such as photovoltaic electrical generation
systems that offset local building energy use.
• Load management measures that shift building electrical loads and support the effective
utilization of renewable and low carbon generation sources on the electric grid.
In the proposed requirements, renewable and load management credits are limited in their use
to meet requirements to avoid diluting the impact of energy efficiency measures.
The credit energy efficiency measures considered in the analysis were identified from lists of
energy saving measures recognized as being effective for new construction and major
renovation projects. The big difference between baseline prescriptive requirements and energy
credit measures is that baseline requirements must be applicable to almost all buildings. As a
result, there is a limit on the level of energy efficiency that can be achieved. Because the
selection of energy credit measures is flexible, the credit approach supports achieving deeper
energy savings. For example, lower solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) glass reduces solar heat
gain in commercial buildings, saving cooling energy. At certain limits, low SHGC glazing
products may have inventory or supply issues in some styles and locations. As a result, there is
limit to how low SHGC requirements are set for the baseline prescriptive requirement. This
helps meet the supply needs of the construction industry. Since there are lower SHGC products
available, energy credits can account for their use; however, if a particular design includes the
baseline prescriptive SHGC product, the designer can choose some other energy credit
measure, like increased cooling efficiency or added insulation in exterior walls, to achieve
similar savings.
Energy efficiency credits were sourced from Advanced building guidelines like the Advanced
Energy Design Guidelines (ASHRAE 2019b), prescriptive energy code requirements in general,
measures in utility new construction programs, green building programs, and other building
industry documentation to arrive a list of potential measures. The measures build on existing
measures that were previously developed (Hart et al. 2019) and include measures considered
by other code development groups including the State of Washington technical review
committee. Table 1 lists the energy efficiency measures included in this technical brief and
shows how they relate to measures in the 2021 IECC Section C406.
There are several load management measures in this proposal, which are listed in Sections 3.8
and 3.9. For reference, in the IECC, the renewable measure was previously included with the
2021 IECC credit measures; however, the load management measures are a proposal for IECC
2024. Renewable and load management measures proposed for 90.1 include:
• R01: On-Site Renewable Energy (2021 IECC Section C406.5; 90.1 Section 13.5.2.6)
• G01: Lighting load management (90.1 Section 13.5.2.8.1)
• G02: HVAC load management (90.1 Section 13.5.2.8.2)
• G03: Automated shading (90.1 Section 13.5.2.8.3)
• G04: Electric energy storage (90.1 Section 13.5.2.8.4)
• G05: Cooling energy storage (90.1 Section 13.5.2.8.5)
• G06: SHW energy storage (90.1 Section 13.5.2.8.6)
• G07: Building thermal mass (90.1 Section 13.5.2.8.7)
There are several ways to evaluate energy savings in a building. Among them are:
• Energy cost savings, based on local or national average prices
• Site energy savings, based on delivered (metered) energy measured in a consistent
conversion to a common metric such as British thermal units (Btu) or gigajoules (GJ)
• Source energy savings, which include adjustments to site energy savings to reflect the
conversion efficiency of electrical generation and drilling and distribution losses for natural
gas
• Emission savings, usually expressed as carbon equivalent (CO2e), which may be based on
a national conversion rate, regional electric conversion rates, or various streams of future
emission impact resulting in a range of possible results
For the 90.1 addendum ap analysis, the energy credits are based on site energy cost.
1. The measure was reviewed to determine the differences in building and system
configuration that would contribute to energy savings.
2. One or more prototypes were used to run the baseline and improved building cases to
find the relative savings in 19 ASHRAE climate zones. Prototypes were selected based
on the relevance of each individual measure.
3. The energy savings was characterized as a percentage cost reduction in the modeled
building prototype end uses.
4. End-use breakdowns from the Standard 90.1-2019 performance indicator analysis were
used as prototype group 1 basis and the group prototype savings was projected based on
proration of end-use savings by the analyzed prototype percentage end-use savings
(Nambiar et al. 2021).
2.2.1 Methodology
DOE uses three possible scenarios when evaluating cost effectiveness: (1) publicly owned
method, (2) privately owned method, (3) ASHRAE Scalar Method (Hart and Liu 2015). 2 For this
analysis of commercial building measures, the ASHRAE Scalar Method was applied, since this
is the method used to evaluate the commercial model code, Standard 90.1.
The Scalar Method was developed by ASHRAE Standing Standard Project Committee (SSPC)
90.1 to examine the cost effectiveness of evaluating a specific addendum to Standard 90.1
(McBride 1995). The Scalar Method is an alternative life-cycle cost approach for individual
energy efficiency changes with a defined useful life, taking into account first costs, annual
energy cost savings, annual maintenance, inflation, energy escalation, and financing impacts.
The Scalar Method allows a discounted payback threshold (scalar ratio limit) to be calculated
based on the measure life. A measure is considered cost effective if the simple payback (scalar
1 Prototype groups reflect the building use types that designate separate tables of available energy
credits. For example, the school building use type is a composite of the primary and secondary school
prototype end uses.
2 https://www.energycodes.gov/commercial-energy-and-cost-analysis-methodology
ratio) is less than the scalar limit. Limits for both heating (primarily gas, SRh) and cooling
(primarily electricity, SRc) are shown in Figure 5.
Table 2 shows the economic parameters used for the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2022 analysis
that were also used for this study. These parameters were adopted by the ASHRAE 90.1 project
committee.
Table 2. Scalar Ratio Method Economic Parameters and Scalar Ratio Limit
Heating Cooling
(gas) (electricity)
Input Economic Variables SRh SRc
Economic Life – Years (example) 40 40
Down Payment - $ 0.00 0.00
Energy Escalation Rate - %(a) 2.90 2.25
Nominal Discount Rate - %(b) 8.1 8.1
Loan Interest Rate - % 5.0 5.0
Federal Tax Rate - % (b)
NA (b)
NA(b)
State Tax Rate - %(b) NA(b) NA(b)
Heating – Natural Gas Price, $/therm 0.983
Cooling - Electricity Price $/kWh 0.1099
Scalar Ratio Limit (weight: 0.25/0.75 ) 25.4 22.0
(a) The energy escalation rate used in the scalar calculation for 90.1-2022
includes inflation, so it is a nominal rather than a real escalation rate.
(b) Beginning with addenda for 90.1-2016, SSPC 90.1 eliminated tax
analysis from the Scalar Method by using a pre-tax discount rate.
As the Scalar Method is designed to be used with a single measure with one value for useful
life, it does not account for replacement costs. PNNL extended the Scalar Method to allow for
the evaluation of multiple measures with different useful lives (Hart and Liu 2015). This
extension is necessary to evaluate a package of measures. This extended method takes into
account the variation in lives for different measures in the package. In some cases, the costs
were negative, so the individual measure lives were weighted based on savings to determine a
package weighted measure life. The scalar ratio limits ranged from 13.8 to 20.5 across all
building types and climate zones with an average of 16.6. See Appendix E for detailed
thresholds.
The measure costs and savings for the package are tallied and an overall payback is found.
This result is compared to the scalar ratio limit for the savings weighted lives. Due to differing
escalation rates for different energy types, the scalar threshold is determined separately for
heating (primarily gas, SRh) and cooling (primarily electricity, SRc). To develop one scalar
threshold that can be used across building types, the gas (SRh) and electric (SRc) scalar limits
were weighted at 25% and 75%, respectively. The packages of changes for each combination
of prototype and climate location were considered cost effective if the corresponding scalar ratio
was less than the scalar ratio limit.
The energy credit requirements are justified based on a selection of a package of measures that
meet the requirement and are cost effective for each building use type and climate zone. About
one quarter of the measures were selected for inclusion in the cost effectiveness analysis,
based on their general applicability and reliable savings. Two demonstration packages were
reviewed, one to evaluate cost effectiveness and one to show a reasonable package without
using efficiency improvements for HVAC and SWH equipment subject to EPACT (42 USC 6833)
minimum federal efficiencies:
• The base demonstration package included standard efficiency measures with a cap of 5%
for required credits to allow for measure selection flexibility. While the energy credits are
limited to 5% whole-building savings, in many cases the selected measures that were cost
effective exceeded that savings level cap.
• The alternative demonstration package was selected by replacing HVAC and SWH
equipment with alternative reasonable measures to achieve similar savings to the base
demonstration package. Cost effectiveness was not determined for the alternate package.
Table 3 provides an overview of measures selected for inclusion in the base demonstration
package. Measures are selected with the goal of 5% savings or 50 credits for this package.
Measure selection may be climate zone specific. For example, cooling efficiency only makes
sense in warm climate zones. The climate zones (CZ) or application of measures is shown
along with individual measure lives used for determining cost effectiveness.
Based on this selection of measures, the scalar value or payback for each building type for the
selected group of measures is given in Table 4. This represents the cost for all measures
included in the package divided by the annual consumer energy cost savings. Note that for
multifamily buildings and hotels, the SHW distribution redesign results in a significant cost
reduction, so the overall package cost is less than the baseline and the “CE” indicates that the
packages in those buildings are immediately cost effective. A scalar limit or threshold is
developed for each combination of climate zone and building type based on the individual
measure lives shown in Table 3, weighted by the measure cost savings. The measures included
in the base package—and therefore credits required—are adjusted so that all building types in
all climate zones have a consumer payback that is less than the scalar limit, indicating cost
effectiveness of at least one combination of measures for the efficiency credit requirements. The
office and warehouse building type paybacks were closest to the scalar limits, but even there,
the payback was always less than the scalar limit. See Appendix E for detailed results.
Table 4. Scalar Ratios for Base Demonstration Package Efficiency Measures by Climate Zone and Building Type
Climate Zone
Building Use Type 0A 0B 1A 1B 2A 2B 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 4C 5A 5B 5C 6A 6B 7 8
Multifamily/Dormitory 6.8 7.4 8.2 7.9 9.0 11.2 13.2 11.6 13.3 12.2 10.6 14.1 10.1 10.4 14.7 8.7 9.8 9.0 7.8
Health Care 2.6 2.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.8 3.6 3.9 3.8 3.9 4.0 3.6 3.6 3.8 2.8 3.3 2.8 2.4 2.2
Hotel/Motel 3.2 3.6 4.0 3.9 4.4 5.0 5.6 5.5 5.2 5.7 5.2 5.9 5.9 5.8 6.1 5.3 5.6 4.9 4.4
Office 6.3 4.4 5.0 4.6 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.2 5.7 5.3 4.9 5.8 5.5 7.5 9.2 8.3 7.6 7.9 8.4
Restaurant 3.2 3.4 3.9 3.8 3.9 4.3 4.3 4.4 5.1 4.5 4.6 4.8 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.3 3.9 3.7
Retail Buildings 5.9 6.1 7.3 7.0 8.7 9.2 11.5 11.3 12.2 10.5 11.2 12.4 8.5 9.2 11.0 7.2 8.5 8.6 7.5
School/Education 3.7 4.0 4.7 4.3 5.0 5.4 6.2 5.7 6.0 6.0 5.4 6.5 8.3 7.4 8.6 7.7 7.7 7.8 8.1
Warehouse 10.5 10.4 10.8 10.6 9.8 9.0 10.1 8.9 9.3 10.9 9.1 11.1 9.0 9.0 11.9 7.4 8.2 7.8 8.6
Figure 6 shows the contribution of different measure types in the demonstration package to achieving the required credits. The
contribution of different types is based on a selection of reasonable measures to demonstrate cost effectiveness. Other measure
mixes or selections could have been made, resulting in different weights of contribution. Two specific restrictions should be noted:
• The multifamily demonstration package would have been much more aligned with end uses in the building with the selection
of central service water heating measures. Such a selection would have been more cost effective as well. The measures
were selected to avoid service water heating to demonstrate that an effective package could be created for multifamily
buildings that are designed with individual water heaters for each apartment.
• The warehouse building type includes almost double the required credits in the demonstration package. While the
requirement is limited to 5% building cost savings like the other buildings, since a large portion of the credits come from
renewable energy, it was important to demonstrate that a good share of credits could be achieved even in situations where
renewable energy was restricted due to limited roof area or low insolation.
Envelope performance captures savings from multiple improvements in the building envelope:
• Increased insulation reduces heat loss and gain, reducing heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning (HVAC) energy use.
• Improved glazing reduces energy use through any of the following:
– Lower U-factor results in less heat transfer, reducing HVAC energy.
– Lower SHGC reduces heat gain, saving cooling.
– Increased glazing visual transmittance allows more daylight, reducing lighting where
there are daylight controls.
– A reduced window area generally provides savings.
• Lower reflectivity reduces cooling loads in warm climates.
• Better air barriers reduce outdoor air leakage into the building, reducing HVAC energy.
While these general improvements usually save energy, in some cases they may not. All of
these impacts can be modeled in the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 methodology that is accessible in
COMcheck. The input to model these changes is the same as needed to verify compliance with
the prescriptive requirements. There are two advantage to using that model for envelope
changes:
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new
measure and an alternative to the UA reduction and air leakage reduction energy credits in the
IECC.
3.3 HVAC
Improvements to the building HVAC system can achieve energy credits either through the
HVAC performance measure (H01) or a combination of other HVAC measures (H02-H03 and
H05). The residential HVAC control (H04) and dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS) (H05)
measures can be completed independently or in conjunction with other HVAC measures.
This is an alternative lighting performance path that is under development. It is currently out for
public review consideration for Standard 90.1.
Measure H01 requires the installation of HVAC equipment efficiency improvements and
distribution system design upgrades that match the inputs to the HVAC performance analysis. It
is flexible and credits can be achieved when the proposed HVAC system total system
performance ratio (TSPR) is greater than the TSPR of a target system. To be effective, the
TSPR language covered in a separate technical brief would also have to be adopted into the
energy code (Goel et al. 2021). Multiple HVAC system changes can be included, including the
following:
• Improved heating or cooling equipment efficiency, including packaged units, chillers, heat
rejection, and boilers
• Reduced fan energy due to better ductwork design, better fan selection or fan drive and
motor efficiency, and improved fan controls
• Reduced pumping energy due to better piping design, better hydronic configuration, better
pump selection or pump motor and drive efficiency, and improved pump controls
• Separate management of ventilation air including energy recovery, low dedicated outdoor air
system (DOAS) fan power, demand controlled ventilation, energy recovery bypass, or
improved delivery effectiveness
• Improved energy recovery opportunities, including ground loop systems and other energy
recovery systems
Measure H01 saves energy by increasing the overall delivered heating and cooling relative to
the total energy input to the HVAC system, when compared to a target HVAC system that is
selected from available prescriptive systems.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this creates a
new measure. It is an alternative to other HVAC energy credits. In the base code language in
Section 3.0, this is considered a future measure with a reserved space. If a jurisdiction wishes to
adopt this measure as an energy credit, then the instructions in Appendix B should be followed.
Measure H02 requires the installation of more efficient heating equipment than required by the
minimum HVAC efficiency requirements. Examples of such improvements include:
• Replacing a standard furnace or boiler with a condensing furnace or boiler
• Including a heat pump with a higher heating seasonal performance factor or heating
coefficient of performance than the minimum heat pump heating efficiency requirements
Measure H02 does not provide credit for system type or fuel switches, such as from a furnace to
a heat pump or from electric resistance heat to a heat pump. For such system comparisons,
when available H01 (TSPR) can be used instead. In H01, the proposed system is compared to
a preset target system for the building type.
Measure H02 saves energy by increasing the overall delivered heating relative to the heating
energy input to the HVAC system, when compared to the minimum heating efficiency required
in the prescriptive energy code for the proposed heating equipment.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this matches
existing measures with some modification. For H02, the credits are based on a minimum
efficiency improvement of 5% and credits can be adjusted to reflect an efficiency improvement
of up to 20%. This replaces both the 5% and 10% heating efficiency improvement measures in
the 2021 IECC. H02 will be an alternative to the HVAC performance (H01) energy credits when
available.
Measure H03 requires the installation of more efficient cooling or heat rejection equipment than
required by the minimum HVAC efficiency requirements. Examples of such improvements
include:
• Replacing a standard AC unit, chiller, (including heat rejection equipment with water-cooled
chillers) with a higher efficiency AC unit or chiller plus heat rejection equipment
• Including an evaporative assist device for air-cooled equipment where the efficiency
improvement of the cooling equipment efficiency can be documented seasonally
• Measure H03 does not provide credit for system type switches, such as from an air-cooled
chiller to a water-cooled chiller, or from packaged units to variable air volume hydronic units.
For such system comparisons, when available H01 (TSPR) can be used instead. In H01, the
proposed system is compared to a preset target system for the building type.
Measure H03 saves energy by increasing the overall delivered cooling relative to the cooling
energy input to the HVAC system, when compared to the minimum cooling efficiency required in
the prescriptive energy code for the proposed cooling equipment.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this matches
existing measures with some modification. For H03, the credits are based on a minimum
efficiency improvement of 5% and credits can be adjusted to reflect an efficiency improvement
of up to 20%. This replaces both the 5% and 10% cooling efficiency improvement measures in
the 2021 IECC. It will be an alternative to the HVAC performance (H01) energy credits when
available.
Measure H04 requires the installation of a centralized HVAC setback control in multifamily
buildings. The controls will relax temperature setpoints when occupants are away from their
apartments. Alternative approaches to such controls include:
• A main manual control by each dwelling unit main entrance that initiates setback and non-
ventilation mode for all HVAC units serving the dwelling unit and is clearly identified as
“Heating/Cooling Master Setback.”
• Occupancy sensors in each room of the dwelling unit combined with a door switch to initiate
setback and non-ventilation mode for all HVAC units in the dwelling within 20 minutes of a
door switch operation followed by all spaces being vacant. Where separate room HVAC
units are used, individual occupancy sensors are adequate.
• An advanced learning thermostat that senses occupant presence and automatically creates
a schedule for occupancy and provides a dynamic setback schedule based on when the
spaces are generally unoccupied. Where ventilation is provided by a separate system, it
shall also have occupancy sensor control.
Measure H04 saves energy by reducing the temperature difference between interior HVAC
setpoint and outdoor conditions, resulting in reduced heating and cooling system operation. In
addition, ventilation outdoor air is curtailed when the space is unoccupied, resulting is less
heating and cooling of outdoor air.
This measure is applicable only to the multifamily building use type. Compared to the 2021
IECC, this is a new measure. It is allowed in conjunction with either the HVAC performance
(H01) energy credits or other HVAC credits (H02, H03, H05).
Measure H05 requires installation of a ground source loop or other water source loop to serve
individual zone water-to-air heat pumps that provide heating and cooling. To match typical
system design approaches, the simulated bore field is sized to handle the cooling load for about
90% of the operating hours that typically provides half the peak cooling load. When cooling
loads are higher, a dry fluid cooler is used to reject heat.
Measure H06 saves energy primarily by using a moderately high efficiency zone cooling device
that rejects heat to an earth ground sink. In addition, there are savings through reduced fan
energy use with a distributed zone fan system that has relatively short duct runs.
This measure is applicable to all building use types except warehouse, as ground source heat
pumps are rarely used in warehouses. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new measure. It is
allowed in conjunction with other HVAC credits (H02, H03, H06).
Measure H06 requires the installation of local zone or central DOAS sized to provide the
minimum outdoor air ventilation requirements. The DOAS is equipped with an energy recovery
device providing a 65% enthalpy recovery ratio. An energy recovery bypass is required for a
DOAS serving multiple zones.
Measure H05 does not provide credit for zone heating and cooling system type switches, such
as from a packaged terminal air conditioner to a fan coil or from packaged units to variable air
volume hydronic units. For such system comparisons, use H01, TSPR, instead. In H01, the
proposed system is compared to a preset target system for the building type.
Measure H05 saves energy primarily by reducing the fan energy use of the zone heating and
cooling system, since it can be shut down in the deadband when neither heating nor cooling is
required. In addition, there are savings through use of energy recovery to preheat or precool
outside air.
This measure is applicable to health, office, retail, and education building use types. It is not
applicable to multifamily as their fans are typically in cycling mode; not to lodging as guest room
HVAC shutoff controls are already required; not to restaurant as the measure is superseded by
transfer air used for exhaust; and not to warehouse as ventilation requirements are too low and
fans are typically set in cycling mode.
Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a modification of an existing measure. The modifications
include a specified energy recovery specification in addition to zone unit fan control not required
in the existing measure. It is an alternative to the HVAC performance (H01) energy credits.
Measure W01 requires the installation of SHW preheat recovery devices that recover heat from
chiller system heat rejection, kitchen drain water, site-based renewable systems, refrigeration
systems, or some other heat source. The system preheats entering cold water and reduces by
between 30% and 80% the use of non-renewable energy sources for annual SHW heating.
Measure W01 saves energy primarily by reducing the electric or fossil fuel used to heat SHW by
using waste or renewable heat to preheat the cold water entering the system.
This measure is applicable to all building use types, although usually practical only where a
chiller is used. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a modification of an existing measure. It can
be combined with other SHW efficiency (W02 or W03) energy credits. It can be combined with
appropriate non-efficiency SHW (W04 through W09) energy credits.
Measure W02 requires the installation of an air-source heat pump water heater sized to meet
50% of the design water-heating requirement. The system includes either an integrated or
separate hot water storage tank with a pump. In recirculating hot water distribution systems,
there is typically a separate gas or resistance electric heater to reheat the circulated water for
temperature maintenance in periods of low demand.
Measure W02 saves energy primarily by using a more efficient heat pump system rather than
electric resistance or combustion heating. The system heats entering cold water and reduces by
between 30% and 80% the use of non-renewable energy sources for annual SHW heating.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a
modification of an existing measure. It can be combined with other SHW efficiency (W01 or
W03) energy credits. It can be combined with appropriate non-efficiency SHW (W04 through
W09) energy credits.
Measure W03 requires the installation of a gas water heater with higher efficiency than the
minimum prescriptively required. A condensing water heater is required to meet the efficiency
increase to 95%.
Measure W03 saves energy primarily by reducing the gas energy used to provide the same
water heating. Through use of a condensing water-heating coil, the exhaust gas temperature is
lower than a conventional gas water heater, transferring that additional heat to the heated water.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a
modification of an existing measure. It can be combined with other SHW efficiency (W01 or
W02) energy credits. It can be combined with appropriate non-efficiency SHW (W04 through
W09) energy credits.
Measure W01 requires the installation of additional pipe insulation beyond the minimum
required prescriptively.
Measure W01 saves energy primarily by reducing the heat loss from piping delivering the SHW
or recirculating the SHW for temperature maintenance.
This measure is applicable to office, health, multifamily, lodging, and education building use
types that typically have extensive hot water distribution systems. The other building types
typically do not have recirculation systems and savings are quite limited. Compared to the 2021
IECC, this is a new measure. It is allowed in combination with other SHW efficiency (W02 and
W03) energy credits.
Measure W05 requires the installation of point of use water heaters with reduced piping lengths
in buildings that typically use recirculation systems and a central water heater. Good application
of a point of use water heater is a small electric water heater that serves a cluster of restrooms.
Exceptions are provided for showers and kitchens that have local water heaters that require
recirculation for temperature maintenance.
Measure W05 saves energy primarily by reducing the heat lost from SHW piping in two ways:
• Recirculation piping for temperature maintenance along with its heat loss is eliminated.
• Supply piping length is reduced, along with a reduction in heat loss.
This measure is only applicable to office and education building use types where hot water use
is relatively low and there are extensive distribution systems to deliver hot water to remote
restrooms. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new measure. It is one option that can be
selected from the SHW distribution temperature maintenance energy credits (W05 and W06).
Measure W06 requires the installation of thermostatic balancing valves for a recirculation
system rather than manually adjusted or fixed-flow balancing valves. The valves are required to
minimize the return water flow when the branch return temperature is greater than 120°F. These
valves reduce the balancing labor compared with manual valves as they are self-balancing.
Measure W06 saves energy primarily by reducing the recirculation pipe temperature and
associated heat loss. This is because actual temperature is measured rather than a constant
flow delivered regardless of primary supply temperature or an estimate of flow required to
maintain the desired temperature.
This measure is applicable to all building use types where there are recirculation systems.
Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new measure. It is one option that can be selected from
the SHW distribution temperature maintenance energy credits (W05, W06, and W07).
Measure W07 requires the installation of separate dwelling unit SHW meters in multifamily
buildings served by a central water-heating system. A data collection and reporting system is
also required.
Measure W08 saves energy primarily by allowing centrally heated SHW to be reported or billed
to individual tenants, providing an incentive to reduce hot water use.
This measure is only applicable to multifamily building use types where there is some possibility
of affecting hot water use behavior. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new measure. It is
allowed in combination with any other SHW efficiency energy credits.
Measure W08 requires the installation of reduced flow sink, lavatory, and showerhead fixtures in
buildings with residential occupancies. The hot water distribution system must also be sized in
accordance with IAPMO/ANSI, WE●Stand – 2017 Water Efficiency and Sanitation Standard for
the Built Environment (IAPMO 2017) Appendix C. This standard is an alternative path for sizing
multifamily SHW systems and is recognized in some plumbing codes. Using this method for
hotel guest room hot water piping would require a plumbing variance.
Measure W08 saves energy primarily by reducing the SHW end use and by reducing the piping
size, and therefore heat loss, of the SHW distribution piping.
This measure is applicable to multifamily and lodging building use types that have a large
number of dwelling units or sleeping units. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new measure.
It is allowed in combination with any other SHW efficiency energy credits.
Measure W09 requires the installation of shower drain heat recovery devices used to preheat
the cold water serving showers.
Measure W09 saves energy primarily by reducing volume of hot water used for showering,
since the cold water is warmer and less hot water is required to achieve the same mixed shower
water temperature.
This measure is applicable to multifamily, lodging, and schools. Other buildings do not have
enough shower use to provide adequate savings. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new
measure. It is allowed in combination with any other SHW efficiency energy credits.
3.5 Power
The power energy credit measure acknowledges the potential for improved operation for energy
monitoring where not required prescriptively.
Measure P01 potentially saves energy by providing detailed energy use information to tenants
and operating staff of buildings so they can note excess energy use at times when the building
is unoccupied and should have low energy use or where there is increased energy use over
time due to degradation of energy system controls or equipment.
This measure is applicable to all building use types where it is not already required by Standard
90.1. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is essentially the same as an existing measure.
3.6 Lighting
Lighting energy credit measures either reduce lighting power installed or improve the controls
compared to prescriptive requirements.
This is an alternative lighting performance path that is under development. It is currently out for
public review consideration for Standard 90.1. The method combines lighting power reduction
and lighting controls into a comprehensive interior lighting approach that considers interaction of
all possibilities. When available it would provide a comprehensive alternative to L02, L03, L04,
and L06.
L01 is not included as a measure in Addendum ap and will require a future addendum to be
included with energy credits.
Measure L02 requires the installation of dimming lighting systems with central and zonal
controls and an intentional high-end trim adjustment commissioning process for at least half the
building floor area or lighting power.
Measure L02 saves energy by tuning the light levels in different spaces more specifically to the
needed task. This reduces the initial maximum light output to best match the space task visual
need. Additionally, lighting is often designed for higher initial lighting levels to compensate for
luminaire output depreciation over time. The capability to manually or automatically tune lighting
output overtime to maintain task level illumination, allows the added depreciation compensation
power to be saved.
This measure is applicable to all building types except warehouses that are unlikely to have
dimming systems. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a modification of an existing measure. It
can be applied in conjunction with other lighting energy credits, excluding L03 and possibly the
future lighting performance credit (L01), depending on how the final implementation of the
lighting performance measure related to zonal tuning is established. This measure is more
stringent than the current measure through the addition of tuning that provides reliable energy
savings.
Measure L03 requires the installation of full off occupancy sensor controls where time controls
are allowed by the prescriptive path. This allows the lighting system to respond to actual
occupancy rather than time control that is often set for the most expansive scheduled use of the
space. Time controls require manual intervention to turn lighting on outside of scheduled times
or to schedule special events, and eventually evolve to the worst case situation, with extended
“on” periods of time.
Measure L03 saves energy by reducing lighting operation when lighting is not required, since
the spaces are unoccupied. A prime example of this is custodial work performed after hours,
where often the entire building or multiple floors are lit up via the time scheduled controls, even
though the work is occurring in a small area. A time control, or even a bypass switch, lights up
large areas of the building, whereas occupancy sensors control a small area where the work is
actually occurring.
This measure is applicable to all building types except multifamily that have very few areas
where occupancy sensors are suitable and not already required. Compared to the 2021 IECC,
this replaces and expands the enhanced digital lighting control measure. It can be applied in
conjunction with some other lighting energy credits, including L04, L05, and L06.
Measure L04 requires the installation of daylight responsive controls in space types beyond
where they are typically required by current energy codes. So, if the building is arranged to
provide more daylight area than typical, or controls are added to areas where the low wattage
would otherwise exempt the area from daylight responsive controls, then credit is provided for
increased daylight area.
Measure L04 saves energy by increasing the area where electrical lighting reductions can be
achieved with daylight availability at satisfactory levels of illuminance required to perform visual
tasks. This reduces the energy used for lighting and also reduces the energy used for cooling.
This measure is applicable to office, retail, warehouse and education building use types. It is not
applicable to multifamily and lodging buildings as it is not suitable for apartments or guest
rooms. Health and restaurants are not suitable for additional daylighting areas.
Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new measure. It can be applied in conjunction with other
lighting energy credits, excluding the future lighting performance credit (L01).
Measure L05 requires the installation of a centralized master switch near apartment (dwelling
unit) exits that can turn off the entire lighting in the unit with one or two switch operations. This
can be achieved by wiring the lighting circuits through a central switch at the unit entrance.
There is an additional requirement that there be two clearly identified switched receptacles in
each room connected to the unit exit control. It is anticipated these receptacles would be used
for floor lamps or other task lighting. As a master switch, this does not require three-way or four-
way switching. The measure can be implemented with traditional wiring or with wireless remote-
control methods.
Measure L05 saves energy by making it easy for apartment occupants to turn off all lighting in
an apartment when exiting the unit. This reduces lighting operation and also reduces cooling
energy use, although it may increase heating energy use in colder climates.
This measure is applicable to multifamily building use types only. Transient lodging already has
requirements for guest room lighting controls. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new
measure. It can be applied in conjunction with other lighting energy credits, possibly excluding
the future lighting performance credit (L01).
Measure L06 requires that the installed lighting system be at least 5% lower LPD than the
prescriptive lighting power allowance. This can be achieved through selection of higher efficacy
luminaires or a better match of design fixture layout to space lighting requirements.
Measure L06 saves energy by reducing the lighting power required to meet minimum lighting
levels.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a
modification of two existing measures. Rather than listing separate 10% and 20% reductions,
L06 is based on a 5% LPD reduction and can be adjusted up to a 15% LPD reduction (limited to
three times the L06 base credit).. It will be an alternative to the future lighting performance (L01)
energy credits and may be replaced by that performance approach.
There has been some question whether 5% to 15% savings in lighting power is obtainable.
Figure 7 shows results for a Pacific Northwest field study 1 of new construction characteristics.
The field verified installed lighting power densities are shown for three building types: retail,
office, and education. These buildings are for new construction in the State of Washington and
while the sample sizes are small, they represent a range of installed LPDs. For each building
type a range of values is shown:
• The code LPD values for 90.1-2022 as a range from the building area method to a
higher value representing the space by space method estimated at approximately 10%
higher. Additional decorative or display lighting is not included.
1Preliminary results from Washington 2015 Commercial Construction Code Evaluation Study. 2022.
Cadmus for Northwest energy Efficiency Alliance.
• The range of actual LPD values found in the study. Additional lighting is included.
• The range of lighting required to get the energy credits from 5% below the higher 90.1-
2022 space-by-space value to 15% below the lower building area value.
As can be seen in Figure 7, there are several buildings in the sample that could have achieved
all or part of the LO6 LPD reduction credit. It should be noted that all of these buildings met
code in Washington state, even though they might be higher than what is shown for the 90.1
limits, even though generally Washington has more stringent LPD limits. One thing not
accounted for is the additional decorative or display lighting included in the actual LPDs found in
the field when the space-by-space method is used. That could be the explanation for the higher
actual building case. So the L06 energy credit may not be appropriate for all buildings, in which
case a different credit could be pursued; however this actual field data indicates it can be
applied to actual buildings in the field. In all cases the maximum 15% reduction is above the
median building installed LPD.
Figure 7. LPD: 90.1 BAM vs. Field Study in Washington State vs. L06 Credits
Measure R01 saves energy by using renewable energy to offset purchased energy.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a minor
modification of an existing measure. Rather than being fixed at an installation requirement of
0.25 W/ft2 of building area and having a separate measure to accommodate larger renewable
installations, this measure starts at a minimum of 0.10 W/ft2 of building area and allows linear
expansion if a larger system is installed. The alternative annual savings method that is an option
in the current IECC—which required a detailed analysis and review by the building official—is
abandoned to reduce complexity.
3.8 Equipment
More efficient equipment installed in buildings can save energy.
Measure Q01 requires the installation of higher efficiency elevator equipment than is typical.
The requirement is for class A elevators based on ISO 25745-2. The level of efficiency
according to this standard is required to be documented in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019,
although there are no IECC requirements.
Measure Q01 saves energy by providing an increase in elevator energy efficiency, based on an
international standard. The savings come through improved motor and traction efficiency, along
with regeneration in some cases.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is a new
measure. It can be applied in conjunction with other energy credits.
Measure Q02 requires the installation of higher efficiency fryers and ovens that meet Energy
Star specifications in commercial kitchens. In addition, other kitchen equipment installed before
the occupancy permit is required to be more efficient in line with Energy Star specifications.
When claiming this credit, other measures are required to be high efficiency.
Measure Q02 saves energy by reducing the energy used by kitchen equipment, primarily by
reducing standby losses.
This measure is applicable to restaurants. Other buildings with commercial kitchens like schools
or dormitories can receive credits for this measure by treating the dining and kitchen area
separately and using a weighted average of the separate building use credits. Compared to the
2021 IECC, this is an existing measure. It can be applied in conjunction with other energy
credits.
Measure Q03 requires the installation of a fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) system. This
system detects failures in HVAC system equipment and controls and reports them automatically
to building operators.
Measure Q03 saves energy by noting where controls have failed and alerting building
maintenance staff to the problem.
This measure is applicable to all building use types. Compared to the 2021 IECC, this is an
existing measure. It can be applied in conjunction with other energy credits.
The electric grid is transitioning from being centralized, fossil fuel based, and relatively
predictable to being more distributed and dynamic due to increasing levels of generation being
contributed by variable, non-controllable distributed renewable energy resources. Load
management measures provide behind-the-meter demand flexibility in support of a clean, reliant
grid. Automated load management controls can be activated in response to an input signal
based on demand response, dynamic price, TOU price, or building peak demand monitoring to
reduce or shift electric demand and decrease electricity costs. Typically, such communication
interfaces also support value-add cloud-based services that provide improved building operation
through smart analytics, occupant comfort, room scheduling, and optimized space utilization.
Load management measures apply to building equipment and systems capable of storing
energy or shifting building loads. These measures reduce building electric load during periods of
high electric demand and high peak demand prices. They also help maximize the utilization of
on-site renewable energy generation. Load management credit requirements address
capabilities for load flexibility, controls, and operation sequences.
Measure G01 reduces electrical charges by directly reducing lighting levels and power by 20%
using dimming during peak price or demand periods. It has been shown that occupants rarely
notice light reduction levels up to 20% as long as they are dimmed gradually. Also, circadian
rhythm impacts from lighting are not significant when this reduction occurs later in the afternoon
when price signals and building demand are generally high. LED technology has made dimming
much less costly than it was for fluorescent fixtures. The lighting dimming control sequence
requires integration with automated controls that interface with utility signals or local building
demand monitoring software.
This measure is applicable to office, retail, warehouse and education building use types. It is not
applicable to multifamily and lodging buildings as it is not suitable for apartments or guest
rooms. Health and restaurants are not suitable for lighting adjustment in most areas.
Measure G02 requires that building-wide thermostats be reset during peak price periods, with
heating reset during winter peak periods and cooling reset during summer peak periods.
Preheating is engaged for the winter peaks that occur in the early morning, but cooling does not
use pre-cooling. The thermostat setpoints are reset gradually by 3 °F (5 °C) over the peak
period. Research has shown that rather than a fixed full step up in temperature, better peak
reduction can be achieved with a gradual increase of about 2/3 of the setpoint shift over the first
1/3 of the peak period, with the remaining increase gradually over the last 2/3 of the peak period
(Lee and Braun 2008). The HVAC setpoint adjustment control sequence requires integration
with automated controls that interface with utility signals or local building demand monitoring
software.
For systems serving multiple zones that also have an outdoor air ventilation requirement less
than 70% of supply air, additional savings can be achieved by over ventilating just before the
summer peak period and then reducing ventilation during that peak period. This type of average
ventilation is allowed under Standard 62.1. This ventilation shaving is not required for single
zone packaged units or DOASs, and the controls cannot readily handle such a sequence.
This measure is applicable to office, retail, and education building use types. It is not applicable
to multifamily and lodging buildings as it is not suitable to apartments or guest rooms. Health
and restaurants are not suitable for temperature adjustment. Warehouses typically already have
thermostat setpoints at the limit of the acceptable range.
Measure G03 provides automated external shades to reduce solar gain through fenestration
during peak price hours. This credit can be met by exterior roller, movable blind, or movable
shutter shading devices; however, fixed overhang, screen, or shutter shading will not meet the
requirement. Roller shades that reject solar gain but still allow a view are allowed as long as
they provide an effective 50% reduction in net solar gain. Interior shading devices will not meet
the requirement. In addition to automated shading devices, electrochromatic windows that
achieve 50% of SHGC would qualify. This reduced the solar gain into the enclosed space,
consequently reducing cooling loads and cooling equipment energy use during peak price
periods. The automated shading devices require integration with automated controls that
interface with utility signals or local building demand monitoring software.
This measure is applicable to all building use types except warehouses that typically have a
small window area and would not receive much benefit.
Measure G04 requires installation of batteries, flywheels, or other electric storage devices. The
storage devices require integration with automated controls that interface with utility signals or
local building demand monitoring software. Electricity sourced either from renewable generation
or from the grid during off-peak times is stored for release during the on-peak pricing periods.
Measure G05 requires either ice or chilled water cooling energy storage to be installed. Such
storage allows generation of stored cooling medium at night when chilled water or ice is more
efficiently produced. In addition, during peak price periods, stored cooling can be used rather
than electrical cooling systems, reducing building electrical demand. An additional benefit of a
cooling storage system is that the cooling plant size can be reduced, resulting in lower cost. The
cooling storage system requires integration with automated controls that interface with utility
signals or local building demand monitoring software.
This measure is applicable to all building use types, although it is more suited for larger
buildings with chillers and chilled water systems.
• Provide additional hot water storage so that peak service water-heating requirements
can be met without loading electrical hot water generation equipment.
• Preheat SHW above the required temperature and then shut off SHW electric generation
equipment during peak price periods. This approach requires reliable automatic
temperature mixing valves to assure that water delivered to building fixtures is at a safe
temperature.
The SHW storage system requires integration with automated controls that interface with utility
signals or local building demand monitoring software.
• Provide additional building mass exposed to the interior space so that peak cooling
requirements can be met with less reliance on electrical cooling generation equipment.
• Include night flush logic to pre-cool the building at night when unoccupied. Such logic
needs to avoid overcooling the building resulting in morning heating, only operate fans
when the outside air is cold enough to provide a net benefit, and operate at a lower fan
speed to reduce fan energy use.
This measure saves energy more passively by extracting heat from the building at night during
the unoccupied period using mass storage, and then removing heat from the building during the
day when there are internal and solar heat loads. There is no actual OpenADR protocol required
because the cooling loads are naturally reduced during peak price hours.
This measure is applicable to office, restaurant, retail, education, and warehouse building use
types. It is not applicable to multifamily and lodging buildings as it is not adaptable to
apartments or guest rooms. Health buildings typically do not have unoccupied hours.
4.0 References
42 USC 6833. Energy Conservation and Policy Act, Public Law 94-385, as amended.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title42/pdf/USCODE-2011-title42-chap81-
subchapII.pdf. Also see https://www.energycodes.gov/about/statutory-requirements.
ASHRAE. 2019b. Advanced Energy Design Guides (AEDG). American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA, 2004 to 2019.
https://www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/aedgs
Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code,
Nonresidential Grid Integration, Final CASE Report, August 2020.
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=234550&DocumentContentId=67382
Goel S, R Athalye, W Wang, J Zhang, MI Rosenberg, Y Xie, R Hart, and V Mendon. 2014.
Enhancements to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Prototype Building Models. PNNL-23269,
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA.
https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-23269.pdf
Goel S, R Hart, M Tillou, M Rosenberg, J Gonzalez, K Devaprasad, and J Lerond. 2021. HVAC
System Performance for Energy Codes. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland
WA. https://www.energycodes.gov/sites/default/files/2021-07/TechBrief_HSP_July2021.pdf
Hart R, C Nambiar, M Tyler, Y Xie, and J Zhang. 2019. “Relative Credits for Extra Efficiency
Code Measures; Technical Brief.” Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA,
January 2019. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1490280
Hart R and B Liu. 2015. Methodology for Evaluating Cost-effectiveness of Commercial Energy Code
Changes. PNNL-23923, Rev. 1, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
https://www.energycodes.gov/development/commercial/methodology
IAPMO. 2017. IAPMO/ANSI WE●Stand – 2017 Water Efficiency and Sanitation Standard for the
Built Environment. International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials.
https://www.iapmo.org/we-stand
ICC. 2018. 2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). International Code Council,
Country Club Hills, IL. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/iecc2018/
ICC. 2021. 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). International Code Council,
Country Club Hills, IL. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IECC2021P1
References 41
PNNL- 32516
Lee, K, and J Braun. “A Data-Driven Method for Determining Zone Temperature Trajectories
That Minimize Peak Electrical Demand.” In ASHRAE Transactions, 2008, Vol. 114.
ASHRAE, 2008. https://www.techstreet.com/standards/sl-08-007-a-data-driven-method-
for-determining-zone-temperature-trajectories-that-minimize-peak-electrical-
demand?product_id=1715426
McBride M. 1995. “Development of Economic Scalar Ratios for ASHRAE Standard 90.1 R.” In
Proceedings of Thermal Performance of the Exterior Envelopes of Buildings VI, ASHRAE.
http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/2010-Florida-Energy-
Code/901_Scalar_Ratio_Development.pdf
Nambiar C, R Hart, Y Xie, and J Zhang. “End Use Data from Performance Indicator Analysis of
90.1-2019.” 2021. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, April 2021.
https://www.energycodes.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019EndUseTables.zip
PNNL. 2020. “Commercial Prototype Building Models.” Updated August 17, 2020.
https://www.energycodes.gov/development/commercial/prototype_models
WSBCC. 2015. 2015 Washington State Energy Code, Commercial Provisions. Washington
State Building Council, Olympia, WA. https://sbcc.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-
12/2015%20Com%20Energy_3rd_2019.pdf
References 42
PNNL- 32516
For each measure, various measures are used to arrive at general savings, as noted in Table A-
1. These include the following:
• “Sim” indicates direct simulation using EnergyPlus in the 90.1 prototype models PNNL
maintains for Standard 90.1 savings progress reporting.
• “End” indicates using measure results from a 90.1 prototype simulation with EnergPlus
for one building use type and prorating savings based on end-use savings share to the
end-use data for another building use type to determine savings. Note that for H02 and
H03, heating and cooling efficiency, savings is taken as a percentage reduction of
modeled end use for all prototypes as it better reflects the annualized energy savings.
• “Avg” Indicates results for the credits in the calculated building types were averaged for
application to other buildings.
Appendix A A.1
PNNL- 32516
P01 Energy monitoring Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Avg
L02 Lighting dimming & tuning Sim End End Sim End End End End Avg
L03 Increase occupancy sensor NA End End Sim End End End End Avg
L04 Increase daylight area NA NA NA Sim NA End End End Avg
L05 Residential light control Sim NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
L06 Light power reduction Sim End End Sim End End End End Avg
R01 Renewable energy Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Avg
Q01 Efficient Elevator Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Avg
Q02 Efficient Kitchen Equipment NA NA NA NA Eng NA NA NA NA
Q03 Fault detection Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Avg
G01 Lighting load management NA Sim NA Sim NA NA Sim Sim Avg
G02 HVAC load management NA NA NA Sim NA Sim Sim NA Avg
G03 Shading load management Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim NA Avg
G04 Electric storage Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Avg
G05 Cooling storage End End End Sim End End End End Avg
G06 SHW storage Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Sim Avg
G07 Building mass / night flush NA NA NA Sim End End End End Avg
Appendix A A.2
PNNL- 32516
The envelope performance measure is calculated using an overall 10% reduction in Envelope
Performance Factor based on the ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix C methodology. The measure
savings was calculated using a 10% reduction in energy cost index savings for the energy end
uses regulated in Appendix C. The baseline value is the total of both the non-regulated and
regulated uses without any reduction applied.
For purposes of the demonstration package cost effectiveness analysis, a window upgrade
including a double silver coating is included and analyzed using the appendix C process. This
results in a lower SHGC and a lower U-factor as follows:
Savings from the HVAC performance measure (total system performance ratio, TSPR) were
estimated by reducing the overall HVAC energy use from the 90.1-2019 end-use analysis
(Nambiar et al. 2019) by 5% for each building type and all climate zones.
This measure was analyzed by using the energy simulation results for the progress indicator of
the prototypes using EnergyPlus. Then a 5% savings was applied to the end use heating costs
and weighted by building construction for the multiple prototypes in each building use type
group and climate zone.
This measure was analyzed by using the energy simulation results for the progress indicator of
the prototypes using EnergyPlus. Then a 5% savings was applied to the end use cooling and
heat rejection costs for the prototypes and weighted by building construction for the multiple
prototypes in each building use type group and climate zone. This approach better reflects
annualized savings reflected by integrated part load value (IPLV) or integrated energy efficiency
ratio (IEER) as compared with a 5% improvement of full load COP for cooling.
Appendix A A.3
PNNL- 32516
This measure was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of a baseline case to a
measure case in EnergyPlus. The measure case was modeled with a heating and cooling
temperature setback of 5°F for a total of 9 hours (4 hours during the day and 5 hours at night).
This measure was modeled using the medium office prototype that has a packaged VAV system
for the baseline. This measure was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of a
baseline case to a measure case in EnergyPlus. The systems were modeled using the medium
office prototype. The baseline was modeled as a packaged VAV system with electric zone
reheat. The ground source heat pump heating and cooling efficiency was based on minimum
efficiency requirements from the standard for both the baseline VAV system and measure
ground source heat pump systems. For the ground source system, minimum efficiencies were
based on brine-to-air, ground loop heat pumps. The cooling EER was converted to coefficient of
performance (COP), which was used in EnergyPlus. This was done to address the input
requirements of EnergyPlus, which requires COP as the cooling efficiency metric and needs the
fan portion of the testing metric to be removed.
Based on discussion with industry experts, the ground loop bore field was sized based on the
following parameters:
• The simulated bore field is sized to handle the cooling load for about 90% of the
operating hours that typically provides half the peak cooling load.
• When cooling loads are higher than can be met by the ground loop field, a dry fluid
cooler is used to reject heat, based on 90.1 efficiency requirements for a propeller or
axial fan dry cooler (air-cooled fluid coolers) The fluid cooler is located downstream of
the ground bore field.
• Dry cooler was modeled to maintain a maximum loop temperature of 100°F (37.8°C)
• Borehole ("one-way") length: 200 ft of bore hole per ton of load (400 ft bore pipe/ton), for
full capacity, adjusted to match cooling load for about 90% of operating hours or 100% of
heating hours, whichever is highest.
• Bore hole radius: 3 in (6 in diameter)
• Grout thermal conductivity: 0.8 Btu/h∙ft∙R
• Ground thermal conductivity: 1.68 Btu/h∙ft∙R
• Pipe outside diameter: 1.61 in
• Pipe thickness: 0.151 in
• U-tube distance: 2.75 in
• Flow through ground heat exchanger: 3 gpm/ton
• Distance between bore holes, 20 ft.
Results for the measure were applied to other prototypes by prorating end use impacts for the
simulated Medium office to the end use profiles of other building types.
The borehole length was adjusted by the multipliers shown in Table A-2 so the simulated bore
fields alone are able to handle the cooling load for about 90% of the operating hours.
Appendix A A.4
PNNL- 32516
While the base system configuration was based on a typical installation of a ground exchange
bore length to serve 90% of the cooling operating hours, the system efficiency can be increased
by either increasing the ground exchange bore length or using an evaporative fluid cooler for
peak heat rejection. These options were simulated, with the results shown in Figure A-1 and the
resulting consolidated savings and credit multipliers shown in Table A-3.
Appendix A A.5
PNNL- 32516
This measure was modeled using the results from the DOE TSPR analysis tool to model the
impact of dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS) with fan control. The baseline system is a
constant volume fan system that must operate continually at full speed to provide ventilation
during occupied hours. A separate DOAS system was included for the measure, and zonal
heating and cooling unit fans were cycled off during deadband indoor temperatures when
neither heating nor cooling was required. The energy savings for heating, cooling, and fan
energy end use were prorated based on the respective end uses for other climate zones for
applicable prototypes. Note that heating savings is negative due to replacing fan heat due to
reduced fan use. Energy savings based on TSPR analysis with adjustments based on
engineering review was as follows:
For energy credits related to heating service hot water (SHW), the base parameters used for
water usage, pipe and tank losses, and generation efficiency are those documented in the 90.1
progress indicator enhancements (Goel et al. 2014). In many cases, a building type group is
Appendix A A.6
PNNL- 32516
represented by two distinct building prototypes (PNNL 2020). For example, school buildings are
represented by both primary and secondary school prototypes. The SHW measures were
analyzed by post-processing of prototype model results. For each prototype, annual SHW
energy was itemized into categories of water-heating energy use, pipe loss, dump or warmup
loss, and tank loss. These values were then adjusted for the individual SHW measures
according to the measure technologies under consideration.
This measure assumes the use of heat recovery from a water-cooled chiller or water source
heat pump, and accounts for 30% savings in water-heating energy (including losses). The
measure also accounts for increased pumping energy in the central plant required by the energy
recovery equipment.
This measure is based on a multi-fuel baseline SHW system in which 20% of the water-heating
load is handled by electric resistance and 80% is handled by a gas storage water heater. For
the measure, it is estimated that the entire water-heating load is met by an air-source heat pump
water heater (HPWH) system, and that the average COP is as discussed below, including the
effects of any supplemental electric resistance heat.
The air-source HPWH COP is a function of entering water temperature (EWT) and entering air
temperature (EAT). For a stand-alone HPWH for use with a preheat system, typical
manufacturer’s data was regressed to find a formula for COP:
These COP’s were plotted against average expected EWT for different climate zones, based on
multiple passes at a point about 1/3 between ground temperature and a 125°F target
temperature. The COP formulas were used to arrive at a bin temperature weighted COP for
different climate zones. The heating degree days for each climate zone was used as a proxy
independent variable to develop weighted COP curves as follows:
Appendix A A.7
PNNL- 32516
The energy credits for heat pump water heating require a minimum of 30% end-use water
heating be served by the heat pump without supplemental heat. If more is served, up to 80% of
the credits are increased. To avoid operating the heat pump at a high delivery temperature, an
arrangement like that shown in Figure D.1 allows storage of preheated water that is finished to
final temperature with a gas or electric resistance final heater. This configuration is appropriate
for larger systems, while smaller systems may use a single hybrid tank that has a finishing
heater at the top.
Appendix A A.8
PNNL- 32516
This measure was analyzed by post-processing of prototype model results. The baseline is
modeled as a gas storage water heater with a thermal efficiency of 80.3% and the measure
assumes a condensing system with an efficiency of 95%. The result is an overall energy
savings of 15.47%.
For buildings subject to Section 7.5.3 the baseline Et is 90%, so the credits are multiplied by
29.6% to represent the reduced increase in efficiency, based on the following:
Gas
Et input Case Normal 7.5.3
80 1.250 Base 80% 90%
90 1.111 Improved 95% 95%
95 1.053 Savings 0.197 0.058
7.5.3 Share 0.296
For smaller gas water installations, the baseline storage water heater UEF may be around 60,
so an upgrade to an instantaneous gas water heater with a UEF of at least 82% receives 25%
of full condensing water heater credits.
The SHW pipe insulation measure was evaluated by developing a representative pipe run for a
typical multifamily building using the standard Hunter’s Curve method. Baseline pipe insulation
was set based on ASHRAE 90.1-2019 Table 6.8.3-1 (1 inch thick insulation for nominal pipe
sizes less than 1.5 inch and 1.5 inch thick insulation for larger pipes). For the measure, the
insulation thickness was increased by 1 inch for all pipe sizes. Overall thermal resistance for
each pipe size was determined using the energy calculator for horizontal piping on the Whole
Appendix A A.9
PNNL- 32516
Building Design Guide website. 1 The overall reduction in pipe heat loss was thus estimated to
be 24.7% of the baseline pipe heat loss.
Measure W05 is based on a multi-fuel baseline SHW heating system in which 20% of the water-
heating load is handled by an electric resistance heater and 80% of the load is handled by a gas
storage water heater. The measure reduces pipe loss by converting from central water-heating
system with recirculation piping to distributed point of use systems. The conversion is estimated
to reduce overall piping loss by about 80%. For the school system, the showers and kitchen
remain on gas water systems with local recirculation, while hot water for remote restrooms is
provided by small local electric water heaters that do not have recirculation piping.
Measure W06 savings is based on the installation of dynamic thermostatic balancing valves that
decrease the temperature of water in the recirculation piping from an average of 130°F to
120°F. There is also a reduction in recirculation flow when there is active flow in the building hot
water system.
Measure W07 savings is based on reducing water use and the energy to heat it by 5%. There is
no impact on piping or tank losses. Several studies showing an actual 15% savings impact from
individual apartment electric meters support this estimate.
Measure W08 uses a baseline piping layout established for a typical building using the standard
Hunter’s Curve method, and an alternative layout for the same building developed using the
Appendix M method of the 2018 Uniform Plumbing Code. This results in the use of smaller
diameter piping, with a corresponding 26.2% overall reduction in pipe heat loss. There is also a
reduction in actual water use from requiring water wise low flow residential fixtures.
Measure W09 was evaluated based on a 54% recovery effectiveness for a heat exchanger
device that recovers heat from drainwater and preheats the incoming cold water. The resulting
increase in cold water supply temperature into the shower results in a 7.2% savings in hot water
energy use, with no impact on pipe or tank loss.
Energy monitoring of electrical end uses is required for buildings greater than 25,000 square
feet. This credit applies to smaller buildings that install similar monitoring. The monitoring
equipment is much less expensive when installed in a new building rather than retrofit.
1https://www.wbdg.org/guides-specifications/mechanical-insulation-design-guide/design-
objectives/energy-calculator-horizontal-piping
Appendix A A.10
PNNL- 32516
Monitored information can be used by building operating staff and managers to identify high
energy use at unexpected times and improve lighting and HVAC controls or to provide feedback
to occupants who can reduce energy use.
A lighting performance method is under development that would form an alternative to L03, L04,
and L06. It uses a spreadsheet method to
Measure L02 was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of a baseline case to a
measure case in EnergyPlus. The measure case lighting power density is set by reducing 75%
of the space lighting by 7.5% compared to the baseline. This reflects a 15% reduction in initial
tuned light power that is then slowly increased until lamps are replaced. The space types and
modeled lighting power densities for the baseline and measure case for each prototype
analyzed are shown in the table below:
Appendix A A.11
PNNL- 32516
Baseline Measure
Prototype Space Type (W/ft2) (W/ft2)
ApartmentMidRise Corridor 0.49 0.46
Office 0.74 0.70
Hospital Basement 0.64 0.60
Corridor 0.71 0.67
Dining 0.40 0.38
Exam Room 1.40 1.32
Nurse Station 1.04 0.98
ICU 1.25 1.18
Kitchen 1.09 1.03
Lab 1.33 1.26
Lobby 0.82 0.77
Operating Room 2.26 2.13
Office 0.64 0.60
Patient Room 0.68 0.64
Physical Therapy 0.91 0.86
HotelSmall Corridor 0.49 0.46
Lounge 0.42 0.40
Gym 1.08 1.02
Office 0.74 0.70
Stairs 0.49 0.46
Storage 0.38 0.36
Laundry 0.53 0.50
Mechanical Room 0.95 0.90
Conference Room 0.97 0.92
Restroom 0.63 0.59
OfficeSmall Office 0.64 0.60
RestaurantSitDown Dining 0.60 0.57
Kitchen 1.09 1.03
SchoolPrimary Bath 0.63 0.59
Café 0.40 0.38
Computer Room 0.71 0.67
Classroom 0.71 0.67
Gym 0.90 0.85
Kitchen 1.09 1.03
Library 0.83 0.78
Lobby 0.84 0.79
Mechanical Room 0.95 0.90
Office 0.74 0.70
Warehouse Bulk Storage 0.33 0.31
FineStorage 0.69 0.65
Office 0.64 0.60
Appendix A A.12
PNNL- 32516
This measure was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of a baseline case to a
measure case in EnergyPlus. The measure cases are modeled by adjusting the lighting
schedules in spaces that do not contain occupancy sensors in the baseline.
The space types in individual prototypes where this measure was applied, and the
corresponding lighting schedule adjustment rates, are as given in table below:
This measure was analyzed in EnergyPlus using the prototype models by increasing the fraction
of electric lights that can be dimmed when daylight is available at or above illuminance levels
required to perform visual tasks. For this measure, the fraction of floor area capable of being
daylight controlled was increased by 5% compared to the baseline as shown in the table below.
This was accomplished by increasing the fraction of the zone controlled by daylight control
reference point objects in EnergyPlus. Additionally, visible transmittance property of the
windows was increased by a fraction of 1.5 times the minimum solar heat gain coefficient
(SHGC) requirements for non-residential windows per 90.1-2019.
This measure was analyzed in EnergyPlus using the prototype models by reducing the lighting
schedule fraction by 10% for residential spaces and 15% for corridor spaces compared to the
baseline. This measure was only applied to the Midrise Apartment prototype.
This measure was analyzed in EnergyPlus using the prototype models by reducing the lighting
power density (LPD) in non-residential space types by 10% compared to the baseline.
For non-residential spaces specialized light types including task and display lighting were
omitted from the LPD reduction. This applies to the Retail Stripmall prototype.
Appendix A A.13
PNNL- 32516
Baseline Measure
Prototype Space Type (W/ft2) (W/ft2)
ApartmentMidRise Corridor 0.49 0.44
Office 0.74 0.67
Hospital Basement 0.64 0.58
Corridor 0.71 0.64
Dining 0.40 0.36
Exam Room 1.40 1.26
Nurse Station 1.04 0.93
ICU 1.25 1.13
Kitchen 1.09 0.98
Lab 1.33 1.20
Lobby 0.82 0.74
Operating Room 2.26 2.03
Office 0.64 0.58
Patient Room 0.68 0.61
Physical Therapy 0.91 0.82
HotelSmall Corridor 0.49 0.44
Lounge 0.42 0.38
Gym 1.08 0.97
Office 0.74 0.67
Stairs 0.49 0.44
Storage 0.38 0.34
Laundry 0.53 0.48
Mechanical Room 0.95 0.86
Conference Room 0.97 0.87
Restroom 0.63 0.57
OfficeSmall Office 0.64 0.58
RestaurantSitDown Dining 0.60 0.54
Kitchen 1.09 0.98
SchoolPrimary Bath 0.63 0.57
Café 0.40 0.36
Computer Room 0.71 0.64
Classroom 0.71 0.64
Gym 0.90 0.81
Kitchen 1.09 0.98
Library 0.83 0.75
Lobby 0.84 0.76
Mechanical Room 0.95 0.86
Office 0.74 0.67
Warehouse Bulk Storage 0.33 0.30
FineStorage 0.69 0.62
Office 0.64 0.58
Appendix A A.14
PNNL- 32516
The efficient elevator measure is modeled as a reduction in the total electricity consumption of
0.05 kW/ft2. This is based on an analysis of PNNL prototypes with an upgrade of elevators from
standard to premium VDI grade A.
The efficient commercial kitchen measure is calculated based on a more efficient fryer replacing
a standard fryer. The high efficiency fryer is estimated to reduce the total cooking energy end
use by 5.4%. No credit is taken for either lighting or HVAC energy reduction for this measure.
The fault detection measure is modeled by based on an HVAC energy savings of 0.75% by
reducing the system operation faults. This measure is only applied to HVAC energy and lighting
energy reduction is not applied for this measure.
Measure R01 is modeled as 0.1 W rated power of installed photovoltaics per square foot of
building gross floor area. Total system rated power is calculated by multiplying the prototype
gross square footage by 0.1 W. The total array size is estimated using an assumption of 250 W
and 17.6 ft2 per module.
Module insolation is determined for each prototype and climate zone using a calculator that
computes the annual insolation from collector azimuth and tilt for each climate zone. AC power
is calculated from insolation, module efficiency, and system efficiency. The calculator is based
on the EnergyPlus photovoltaic model.
The electricity savings is calculated by subtracting the generated AC power from the baseline
electricity consumption for each prototype and climate zone. The credits for renewable energy
systems are based on the % of building cost reduction achieved through electric generation that
is used in the building, without credit for net metering.
Dissimilar to the energy efficiency credits that are based on energy use savings, the load
management credits are based on energy cost savings. The credit values are determined using
Appendix A A.15
PNNL- 32516
a representative electricity time-of-use (TOU) rate. The rate includes a summer high price
period based on electric demand that occurs during weekday afternoon hours. The rate also
includes a winter high price period based on electric energy use that occurs during early
morning and early evening weekday hours. More information about the TOU rate and its
development are presented in Appendix E.
Establishing load management value through the energy credit code mechanism ensures a
standardized, consistent assessment of impact is applied for compliance purposes. Invariably,
actual building load management operation will be influenced by the building actual electric rate
pricing, building load shape, self-utilization of on-site renewable energy, and other factors.
Nonetheless, the approach credits indicate the relative ability to save electricity costs by
reducing or shifting loads based on a representative rate.
Measure G01 was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of the baseline case to the
measure case in EnergyPlus using the energy code prototype building simulation models. The
lighting load management measure sheds load during the high-cost electric demand periods.
For the representative TOU rate, this period occurs June through September from 1 PM to 9 PM
on weekdays.
The lighting load management measure decreases ambient lighting levels by 20% compared to
their baseline operating capacity during the representative TOU rate summer peak demand
period that is coincident with normal building operating hours. The measure is modeled by
adjusting the interior lighting operating schedule profiles for the general lighting. The figure
below provides an example of this adjustment applied to the medium office building. It indicates
the baseline design lighting power fraction and the adjusted lighting power fraction for the
measure. The lighting power in the analysis is determined for each simulation timestep by
multiplying the total installed lighting power by the hourly fraction indicated in the schedule.
Since this measure aims to decrease lighting and coincident cooling loads, the modified
measure schedule occurs during the hour interval in which the TOU summer peak demand
period coincides with normal building operating hours. For the medium office building, this
results in a lighting schedule modification for hours 1 PM to 5 PM for June through September.
Appendix A A.16
PNNL- 32516
The G02 measure was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of the baseline case to
the measure case in EnergyPlus using the energy code prototype building simulation models.
The measure sheds cooling loads during the high-cost electric demand hours. It also ramps
electric preheat during high electricity energy use periods. For the representative TOU rate, the
high-cost electric demand period occurs June through September from 1 PM to 9 PM on
weekdays. The high-cost electric use period impacting morning warm up occurs from 6 AM to
10 AM during non-summer months
The shedding of cooling load is initiated on weekdays during the months of June through
September. In the analysis, the baseline cooling setpoint temperature increases by 3 F starting
at 3 PM. The setup schedule continues until the night-time temperature schedule commences.
Implementing the measure later in the day after the start of the peak demand period helps to
maintain comfort conditions through the end of the workday while still providing energy cost
benefit resulting from reduced building electric demand.
To reduce energy costs associated with electric heating, a ramped preheat is initiated 2-hours
early compared to the baseline case during the months of October through May. The strategy
reduces the amount of electric energy used for preheating for hours after 6 AM during non-
summer months. To implement the measure, the heating setpoints during the “winter period”
(October to May) were modified to incorporate a longer ramped setpoint morning warm up. The
figure below provides an example of this adjustment applied to the medium office building.
For the representative TOU rate, the high-cost electric demand period occurs June through
September from 1 PM to 9 PM on weekdays. The high-cost electric use period impacting
morning warm up occurs from 6 AM to 10 AM during non-summer months
To estimate the impact of automated shading during peak TOU pricing periods, the modeled
solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) of window assemblies was reduced during these periods by
50%. The same adjustment was made for all building types and climate zones.
Appendix A A.17
PNNL- 32516
For measure G04, electric energy storage is used to shift energy use out of the high-cost
electric demand price period. For the representative TOU rate, the high-cost electric demand
period occurs June through September from 1 PM to 9 PM on weekdays. The battery storage
analysis is implemented as Python scripts that post-process annual hourly demand time-series
data from EnergyPlus simulation output for the code prototype building models. The analysis
determines the annual hourly battery charge/discharge time-series profile and the hourly
building electric demand and energy consumption. The energy costs savings are determined by
applying the representative TOU rate to the building electricity consumption profiles and
comparing the results of the baseline case to the measure case. For the representative TOU
rate, the high-cost electric demand period occurs June through September from 1 PM to 9 PM
on weekdays.
The applied strategy is referred to as the semi-optimized TOU strategy. The strategy discharges
the battery during the “daytime” hours, from 5 AM – 10 PM, and the battery recharge occurs
evenly across each hour during “night-time” from 10 PM to 5 AM. The figure below depicts the
effect of applying the battery operation strategy to the medium office building in climate zone 2A
on July 21st.
The analysis relies on anticipating each day’s demand load profile in the electric billing cycle
month. The semi-optimized TOU strategy is designed to minimize monthly demand costs. It
provides a customized battery operation strategy based on the building load profile and the
representative TOU rate peak demand period. The procedure is outlined below.
1. Specify the “night-time” period in which the building’s electricity demand is at its minimal
and the TOU rate has the lowest demand charge. The period is 10 PM to 5 AM in this
analysis. The battery is charged evenly each hour over this period to achieve full capacity.
2. Based on the building’s historic (e.g., baseline) hourly electricity time-series data, identify
the “worst” demand day for each month.
a. For each month, denote the period with the peak demand rate as period Pm,max.
b. If the month’s TOU rate includes a peak demand period, identify its “worst” day as the day
that contains the highest hourly demand, HDm,max, in period Pm,max after applying the battery’s full
discharge potential across the hours with the highest demand in period Pm,max.
Appendix A A.18
PNNL- 32516
c. If the month’s TOU rate does not contain a peak demand period, consider all non “night-
time” hours as the peak period Pm,max and identify the “worst” day and HDm,max the same way as
above.
During the building’s real-time operation, the battery is discharged for each month during its
Pm,max hours if that hour’s instantaneous demand, Pi, is higher than the month’s HDm,max. The
discharge power for that hour is (HDm,max - Pi) or based on the available battery discharging
power at that time, whichever is less. In short, the battery operation strategy aims to maintain
the monthly building peak demand during Pm,max to be no larger than HDm,max. The battery
operating strategy is intended to level out demand across the hours in the month that have the
highest demand without the battery applied. The approach reduces the cost associated with the
maximum peak demand while minimizing the discharge of the battery during hours when there
is no cost benefit.
The G05 measure was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of the baseline case to
the measure case in EnergyPlus using the large office prototype building simulation model. The
measure reduces cooling electric demand during high-cost electricity demand price periods. For
the representative TOU rate, this period occurs June through September from 1 PM to 9 PM on
weekdays.
An EnergyPlus model was developed for an ice storage system serving the large office
prototype building. The large data center zone was removed from the large office model to
make the baseline energy use profile more representative of a typical commercial building.
Simulations were performed for all ASHRAE climate zones at a storage tank capacity of 1.0 ton-
hours per ton of design day cooling load. Additional simulations were performed for three
climate zones and sizing configurations ranging from 0.5 to 3.0 ton-hours/ton to establish a
relationship between overall performance and system capacity. Energy savings were evaluated
based on the ASHRAE TOU rate. The large office energy results were prorated to other
prototypes based on ratio of peak cooling tons to building floor area.
The G06 measure was analyzed by comparing the SHW energy use and costs for the baseline
and the measure case for each code prototype building. The measure shifts electric SHW load
from high-cost electricity demand price periods to base-cost periods. For the representative
TOU rate, the high cost demand period occurs June through September from 1 PM to 9 PM on
weekdays.
Evaluation of SWH storage was done using spreadsheet calculations based on the PNNL
prototype equipment sizing and hourly hot water use schedules. The storage capacity was
based on the tank size in the prototype, and an assumption that water in the tank could be
heated to a temperature 40 °F above the normal storage setpoint. It was then assumed that the
stored energy would be discharged at a constant rate during the TOU peak period, effectively
giving a peak period demand reduction equal to one fourth of the stored energy. If the SWH
load during the peak period was less than the stored energy, then the peak period reduction
was limited by the load.
Appendix A A.19
PNNL- 32516
The G07 measure was analyzed by comparing energy simulation results of the baseline case to
the measure case in EnergyPlus using the energy code prototype building simulation models.
These measure was analyzed for each code prototype building model and climate zone
locations. The measure reduces cooling load and supports shifting cooling loads from the high-
cost electric demand period to the base-cost period.
Thermal mass was added to the prototype building models to provide 10 pounds/ft2 (50 kg/m2)
of project conditioned floor area of interior-facing exposed thermal mass. Along with thermal
mass, a “night flush” ventilation strategy was modeled.
Night flush is activated when the building is unoccupied and “summer mode” is activated.
Summer mode is activated when the outdoor air temperature exceeds 70 deg. F and is
deactivated when outdoor air temperature falls below 45 deg. F. During night flush, the system
outdoor air damper is open and the fan is running at its minimum speed (assumed to be 66%),
then the outdoor air is then effectively pre-cooling the building. Night flush is stopped if the
indoor average zone temperature is less than morning occupied setpoint, the outdoor air
temperature is less than 5 deg. F below indoor average zone temperature, and in climate zone
0A through 3A if the outdoor dewpoint is below 50 deg F.
Appendix A A.20
PNNL- 32516
The representative TOU rate was developed by the ASHRAE 90.1 SSPC Economics Working
Group (EWG) in the summer of 2019 as part of their regular duties to update economic
parameters utilized in the code development process. The update occurs at the beginning of
each new code cycle. Their recommendations are incorporated into the ASHRAE 90.1 2022
Work Plan, which is drafted to direct the development of the new code. The Work Plan is voted
on by the full ASHRAE 90.1 SSPC during the ASHRAE Winter Conference Meeting. For the
ASHRAE 90.1-2022 code cycle, the committee voted on February 3, 2020 and approved
including the representative TOU rate as an optional alternative for evaluating code change
proposals. The rate, as stated in the ASHRAE 90.1-2022 Work Plan, is defined as follows.
Winter (October through May)
$0.0946 per kWh, peak hours
$0.0571 per kWh, off-peak hours
$5.59 per kW, base
No peak kW charges
Peak: Monday–Friday, 6 AM to 10 AM and 5 PM to 9 PM
Summer (June – September)
$0.1104 per kWh, peak
$0.0586 per kWh, off-peak
$ 5.59 per kW, base
$10.99 per kW, peak
As mentioned, the rate was developed from published and survey data. The utility rate data
source is the OpenEI database 1, which includes over 15,000 published commercial and
industrial rates offered by municipalities, cooperatives, and IOUs. A dataset was created from
the OpenEI data that includes nearly 8,000 rates, after excluding industrial and unique
commercial rates (such as agricultural pumping). The dataset encompasses 2,400 utilities
representing 70% of the electric load across the lower 48 U.S. states (NREL 2017). 2 Based on
an analysis of the dataset, the approximately 6,200 rates listed without demand charges have
Appendix B B.1
PNNL- 32516
an average maximum allowable customer demand of 52 kW. This implies that rates without
demand charges are available generally for smaller buildings. Nearly 1,700 of the listed rates
include demand charges and have an average maximum allowable demand of 700 kW, with
minimum demand to qualify ranging from 50 to 3000 kW. For those rates including a demand
charge, the average cost is $10.18/kW (the standard deviation is $7.35/kW and the maximum
listed is $90/kW). This average demand charge was used as the starting point for establishing
the demand charge in the representative rate.
The representative TOU rate includes electricity kWh and kW charges that vary by hour of day
and season. The on-peak off-peak rate schedule and kWh values were established based on
survey data. The survey was developed by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) and provided to
member IOUs. 1 The survey respondents represent ~ 13% of U.S. IOU commercial customers. 2
A summary of key survey results that informed the ASHRAE TOU rate are provided below.
• About 80% of TOU rate customers have kW demand charges.
• Many customers have two demand charges and two season – a peak and non-peak
season with a peak demand charge and a monthly base demand charge. The difference
between the peak and base demand charge ranged from ~ $4.00 to $5.50 per kW.
• The average energy rate for summer on-peak and off-peak charges are $0.096/kWh and
$0.066/kWh. The average difference between on-peak and off-peak charges is
$0.030/kWh.
• The average energy rate for Winter on-peak and off-peak charges are $0.092/kWh and
$0.064/kWh. The average difference between on-peak and off-peak charges is
$0.028/kWh. The average difference between Winter on-peak and off-peak energy
charges is $0.028 per kWh.
• The number of on-peak hours per week averaged 39 for summer and 33 for winter.
• The average summer weekday schedule started/ended at 12:45 PM and 8:00 PM.
• The average Winter weekday schedule started/ended at 7:50 AM and 1:30 PM and 5:00
PM and 9:15 PM.
Based on the data outlined above, as well as professional judgment and some additional data
not reported herein (including the most common responses for peak period start and end times),
the values underlying the ASHRAE TOU rate are as follows.
Winter (October through May)
$0.0876 per kWh, peak hours
$0.0528 per kWh, off-peak hours
$5.18 per kW, base
No peak kW charges
Peak: Monday–Friday, 6 AM to 10 AM and 5 PM to 9 PM
Summer (June – September)
1 Organized in 1933, EEI provides public policy leadership, strategic business intelligence, and essential
conferences and forums to all U.S. investor-owned electric companies.
2 ASHRAE TOU rate presentation made by Stephen Rosenstock to the ASHRAE 90.1 EWG on
Appendix B B.2
PNNL- 32516
Appendix B B.3
PNNL- 32516
Multifamily/Dormitory 97 89 80 83 73 54 46 52 46 50 57 43 65 64 45 76 67 74 85
Healthcare 271 241 232 228 229 181 193 176 127 124 123 135 151 144 192 165 171 201 219
Restaurant Buildings 621 577 492 514 492 446 454 443 364 413 406 392 418 423 412 439 436 478 502
Appendix C C.1
PNNL- 32516
Multifamily/Dormitory 660 660 660 660 660 605 605 605 605 605 605 605 661 661 661 661 661 661 661
Healthcare 694 694 694 694 694 694 694 694 490 490 490 490 546 546 546 546 482 482 482
Hotel/Motel 546 546 546 546 546 546 409 409 409 409 409 409 409 408 371 408 408 408 408
Office Buildings 663 489 489 489 353 353 353 353 353 353 353 353 353 527 527 527 527 527 527
Restaurant Buildings 1972 1972 1935 1935 1935 1935 1935 1935 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867
Retail Buildings 701 733 701 701 701 701 665 633 633 670 670 670 506 538 538 471 471 471 471
School/Education Buildings 449 449 449 449 449 449 313 313 313 313 313 313 394 394 394 394 394 394 394
Warehouse and Semiheated 387 387 387 387 319 319 319 319 319 319 319 319 322 287 287 288 288 289 289
Multifamily/Dormitory 6.8 7.4 8.2 7.9 9.0 11.2 13.2 11.6 13.3 12.2 10.6 14.1 10.1 10.4 14.7 8.7 9.8 9.0 7.8
Healthcare 2.6 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.8 3.6 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 3.6 3.6 3.8 2.8 3.3 2.8 2.4 2.2
Hotel/Motel 3.2 3.6 4.0 4.0 4.5 5.1 5.7 5.6 5.3 5.8 5.3 6.0 6.0 5.9 6.2 5.4 5.7 5.0 4.4
Office Buildings 6.3 4.5 5.0 4.6 5.8 5.4 5.4 5.3 5.8 5.4 5.0 5.9 5.6 7.6 9.3 8.4 7.7 8.0 8.5
Restaurant Buildings 3.2 3.4 3.9 3.8 3.9 4.3 4.3 4.4 5.1 4.5 4.6 4.8 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.3 3.9 3.7
Retail Buildings 5.9 6.1 7.3 7.0 8.7 9.2 11.5 11.3 12.2 10.5 11.2 12.4 8.5 9.2 11.0 7.2 8.5 8.6 7.5
School/Education Buildings 3.7 4.0 4.7 4.3 5.0 5.4 6.2 5.7 6.0 6.0 5.4 6.5 8.3 7.4 8.6 7.7 7.7 7.8 8.1
Warehouse and Semiheated 10.5 10.4 10.8 10.6 9.8 9.0 10.1 8.9 9.3 10.9 9.1 11.1 9.0 9.0 11.9 7.4 8.2 7.8 8.6
Appendix C C.2
PNNL- 32516
Multifamily/Dormitory 14.4 14.4 15.0 14.8 15.4 16.8 17.6 17.6 16.4 18.2 17.9 18.0 17.3 17.7 17.9 17.5 17.7 17.8 17.6
Healthcare 14.3 14.4 15.1 15.0 15.7 16.0 17.0 17.2 20.1 20.2 20.0 20.5 18.9 19.3 20.0 18.6 19.0 18.7 18.4
Hotel/Motel 13.9 13.9 14.5 14.4 15.0 15.1 17.0 17.0 17.2 17.2 17.1 16.6 16.6 15.6 15.2 15.1 15.2 15.2 15.1
Office Buildings 14.7 14.5 15.1 14.9 17.1 16.9 17.3 17.5 17.6 17.9 17.9 17.8 18.1 18.1 18.2 18.7 18.2 18.4 18.9
Restaurant Buildings 14.4 14.3 13.7 13.7 14.0 13.8 14.4 14.2 13.8 15.1 14.8 14.7 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.6 15.5 16.3 16.8
Retail Buildings 14.5 14.3 14.9 14.9 15.2 15.4 16.2 16.6 16.5 16.3 16.6 16.4 14.4 14.6 14.4 14.5 14.8 14.6 14.3
School/Education Buildings 14.3 14.5 15.2 15.0 15.6 16.0 18.5 18.5 18.3 19.0 18.9 19.0 19.6 19.4 19.4 19.8 19.6 19.9 20.1
Warehouse and Semiheated 15.0 14.9 15.2 15.1 15.4 15.6 15.4 15.7 15.6 15.3 15.7 15.3 14.8 15.8 15.7 15.1 15.4 15.1 15.0
Multifamily/Dormitory 2.1 2.0 1.8 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.2 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.3
Healthcare 5.6 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.2 4.2 4.7 4.3 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.7 5.3 5.1 7.0 5.6 6.7 7.8 8.4
Hotel/Motel 4.3 3.9 3.6 3.6 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.3 3.0 3.2 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.4 2.8 2.7 3.1 3.4
Office Buildings 2.3 3.3 3.0 3.2 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.0 3.2 2.4 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.2
Restaurant Buildings 4.6 4.2 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.2 3.4 3.3 2.7 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.6 4.2 4.5
Retail Buildings 2.4 2.3 2.0 2.1 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.3 1.7 1.6 1.3 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.9
School/Education Buildings 3.9 3.6 3.3 3.5 3.1 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.5 2.9 2.4 2.6 2.2 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.5
Warehouse and Semiheated 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.7 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.3 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.7
Appendix C C.3
PNNL- 32516
E01a Glazing U & SHGC Reduction $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070
H02 Heating Efficiency $0.056 $0.056 $0.056 $0.056 $0.056 $0.056 $0.056
H04 Residential HVAC control. $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153 $0.153
L05 Residential light control $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133 $0.133
L06 Light power reduction $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018
R01 Renewable energy $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231
Appendix C C.4
PNNL- 32516
Appendix C C.5
PNNL- 32516
E01a Glazing U & SHGC Reduction $0.074 $0.074 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037 $0.037
H03 Cooling efficiency. $0.068 $0.068 $0.068 $0.068 $0.068 $0.068 $0.068 $0.068
W03 Efficient gas water heater $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225 $0.225
L06 Light power reduction $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174 $0.174
R01 Renewable energy $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231
Q02 Efficient Kitchen Equipment $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201 $1.201
L04 Increase daylight area $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035
L06 Light power reduction $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087 $0.087
R01 Renewable energy $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231
Q03 Fault detection $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117 $0.117
E01a Glazing U & SHGC Reduction $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041 $0.041
W05 Point of use water heaters ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081) ($0.081)
L06 Light power reduction $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122 $0.122
R01 Renewable energy $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231
Appendix C C.6
PNNL- 32516
H02 Heating Efficiency $0.003 $0.003 $0.003 $0.004 $0.004 $0.005 $0.005
L04 Increase daylight area $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.070 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035 $0.035
L06 Light power reduction $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018 $0.018
R01 Renewable energy $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231 $0.231
Appendix C C.7
PNNL- 32516
Appendix C C.8
PNNL- 32516
Appendix C C.9
PNNL- 32516
Appendix C C.10
PNNL- 32516
Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory
902 Battelle Boulevard
P.O. Box 999
Richland, WA 99354
1-888-375-PNNL (7665)
www.pnnl.gov