Upload
illinois-ashrae
View
429
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Paul Erickson of Affiliated Engineers presents Preliminary Modeling & Life Cycle Costing: Underpinnings of Integrated Design at the 2012 Chicago Energy Modeling Conference.
Citation preview
Slide 1
Preliminary Modeling & Life Cycle Costing: Underpinnings of Integrated Design
Paul Erickson, LEED AP, Sustainable Practice Leader
ASHRAE | Chicago Energy Modeling Conference | February 14, 2012
Slide 2
Costs Over Time
Slide 3
Cost Compression
Slide 4
The Operational Savings Opportunity
Slide 5
Agenda
1. Why the universal drive to reduce operating costs now? 2. Getting more from the Integrated Design Process 3. The impact of BIM 4. Robust decision making process 5. The Learning Objectives 6. Questions
Slide 6
Why the Drive to Reduce Operating Costs Now?
FIVE DRIVERS
Slide 7
Driver 1 42 States Have Projected Shortfalls for Fiscal Year 2012 Short of Money
Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | CBPP survey
Slide 8
Driver 2 Endowment Data Short of Money
1 Institutions ranked by size of endowment in 2009. NOTE: Degree-granting institutions grant associate's or higher degrees and participate in Title IV federal financial aid programs. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Digest of Education Statistics, 2010 (NCES 2011-015), Table 372.
Slide 9
24 Years
Driver 3 Energy Prices Going Up; Operational Costs Going Up
Compounds difficulties of budget reductions
24 Years
Slide 10
Source: College Planning & Management/Feb. 2011
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
$16B
$14B
$12B
$10B
$8B
$6B
$4B
$2B
$0
Total Construction
HISTORY OF COLLEGE CONSTRUCTION COLLEGE CONSTRUCTION COMPLETED ($000’S), 1995 THROUGH 2010
Driver 4 Recent Building Boom on Campuses = Greater Demand on Operating Budgets
Slide 11
Driver 5 Reducing Energy – Bar Raising Codes for New & Renovated Construction
Progression of the ASHRAE 90.1 Energy Standard
Slide 12
The Result The Result The Need for an Integrated Solution
Slide 13
Traditional
Integrated Design Efforts to Date
If Traditional Design Effort has been this…
Slide 14
• Goal: Construction Cost Savings to Owners • Result: Limited Realization of Cost Savings to Owners
Integrated Design Efforts to Date
Integrated Effort has been…
Slide 15
1. Harness the Industry’s Dynamically Developing Tools BIM Energy Modeling
2. Improve the Design Decision Making Process Timing of Team Engagement Decision Making Process (tools and metrics)
3. Amplify Owner’s Expectations The Project Champion Day to Day : Project Manager
How Do We Get More from the Integrated Delivery Process?
Slide 16
BIM: One Tool, Uneven Development
Slide 17
BIM’s Promise
Slide 18
BIM’s Pending Architecture: The Anticipated Path to Reduce Operating Costs
Slide 19
Real-time evaluation of performance Near real-time adjustment of operation parameters Maintaining the original design savings
BIM’s Pending Architecture: Continuous Retro-Commissioning
Slide 20
Real-time evaluation of performance Calculation of avoided maintenance cost impact Prioritization of maintenance tasks Intuitive data and product information access Single interface and point of content update
BIM’s Pending Architecture: Facilities Management Tools
Slide 21
Effective Decision Making Potential
Slide 22
Our Experience . . . • Typical Integrated Design alone will not deliver operations savings • A clear financial metric alone will not deliver operations savings
Our Position The complexity and contagious rate of change requires:
An Effective and Nimble Decision Making Process
Slide 23
An Effective and Nimble Decision Making Process • Driven by:
• Accelerated Team Engagement • Financial Metrics which consider operating costs • Decision Making Tools that can accommodate competing and changing goals
• operating costs, • LEED, • Simple Payback • etc.
Slide 24
• Typical Integrated Design process generally produces: • More coordinated drawings • Fewer RFIs and change orders • More User/FM interaction and input during design • Some energy savings
• Earlier engagement is necessary for early decision making
Timing of Team Engagement
Slide 25
Decision Making Metrics are Not Equally Useful
Slide 26
Decision Making Metrics are Not Equally Useful
Slide 27
Decision Making Process
Slide 28
Decision Making Process
Slide 29
Analysis and Decision Making
Questions to Consider • How does this analysis happen soon enough to inform the Charrette or early
budgeting? • How do the consultants know what the goals are prior to the charrette? • Doesn’t the design team just default to “same-old” design early on? • What happens when the input/experience seems to be counterproductive to
the goals? • How can the energy modeling be “detailed” if the building architecture
isn’t set? • How can the modeling keep up with the timeline? Who should do it? • How do we determine if some strategies are worth tabling? • How does the LCCA get good first cost numbers? Maintenance cost
numbers? • How does the estimating fit into the timeline? Who should do it? • Whose responsibility is it to identify/pursue alternative funding? • How do we navigate the VE exercise? A menu would be nice… • Are the LCCA results meaningless if we mix and match strategies? • What if we don’t believe the results? • How do we accommodate items that are difficult to price? • How can the design team support the Decision Maker? • What are some examples of the type of support?
Slide 30
Sustainability Charrette
Energy Performance Modeling
Slide 31
CODE 20% Better
40% Better
End of Concepts (inform estimate)
Energy Performance Modeling
Net-Zero Net-Zero
Slide 32
• Appropriate level of detail • Modeling output only as good as the inputs • A/E vs third-party modeler • Models best at deltas, not absolutes
Energy Performance Modeling - Takeaways
Slide 33
Goals and Metrics
Design Goals Life Cycle Cost University Decision Maker
Slide 34
• Clear definition of metrics and goals • Stakeholder input is essential • Sensitivity analyses can accommodate uncertainties
Goals and Metrics - Takeaways
Slide 35
Cost Hurdles: First Cost AND Operating Cost
Slide 36
Capitalizing on LCCA data
Navigating the VE Sea
Slide 37
Navigating the VE Sea
• Multiple project goals must be addressed • Richness of LCCA data allows for adaptation • The modeling and LCCA provide a foundation throughout
Slide 38
Summary
Slide 39
Summary
Slide 40
• Typical Energy Savings: 15-20% • Typical Energy Cost Savings: 10-15% • Simple payback range: 3-7 yrs
Strategies Energy Recovery Wheel
Slide 41
• Typical Energy Savings: 5-10% • Typical Energy Cost Savings: 3-7% • Simple payback range: 0-4 yrs
Strategies Active Chilled Beams
Slide 42
HRC RECOVERED ENERGY
• Typical Energy Savings: 10-20% • Typical Energy Cost Savings: 10-15 % • Simple payback range: 3-7 yrs
Strategies Heat Recovery Chiller (HRC)
Slide 43
• Typical Energy Savings: 5-15% • Typical Energy Cost Savings: 3-12% • Simple payback range: 1-4 yrs
Strategies Demand Control Ventilation
Slide 44
Example Results: Integrated Design for Reducing Operating Costs
Slide 45
1. Unprecedented Drive to Reduce Operating Costs 2. Preliminary Modeling and Life Cycle Costing are the Right Tools to
Reduce Operating Costs 3. Amplified Client Commitment will lead to Reduced Operating Costs
Today’s Takeaways
Slide 46
Slide 47
Preliminary Modeling & Life Cycle Costing: Underpinnings of Integrated Design
Paul Erickson, LEED AP, Sustainable Practice Leader
ASHRAE | Chicago Energy Modeling Conference | February 14, 2012