April/May 2009
A Case Study
C O N T E N T S
Executive Director's Corner: Standing with Giants, by Deb Kleinman
Special: Remembering Greg Franta, by Annette Stelmack
LEED: Aardex Receives Second Platinum LEED Certification from the USGBC, by Mike Hehir
Energy Incentives: Xcel Announces New Incentives, by Erine Mathe
Sustainable Development: Grassroots Efforts Support a Sustainable Ethic, by Sarah Martinez
Government: Greening the Government: State Leads by Example, by Angie Fyfe
Case Study: Extracting Value From NAIOP's Highly Criticized Building Cost Report, by Courtney France
Go Green, Save Money: Rep. Perlmutter Legislation Promotes Going Green To Save Green, by Christopher Votoupal
Colorado Building Green is the official newsletter of the U.S. Green Building Council – Colorado Chapter, and is published bi-monthly. If you are interested in submiting a story, ideas or other information for publication, please contact the editor at sarah@usgbccolorado.org
The Reality of Case Studies: Extracting Value from NAIOP's Highly Controversial Building Cost Report
For most projects, a real challenge to balance environmental responsibility and developmental profitability still exists.
By Courtney C. France, Principal, France Sustainability Solutions
For most projects, a challenge to balance environmental responsibility and developmental profitability still exists. In an attempt to further this understanding, the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties (NAIOP) , a leading organization for the commercial real estate development community, released a report to investigate the economic impacts related to achieving specific energy savings for low-rise office buildings. The February 2009 report was essentially a ‘cost feasibility gut-test’ of the commercial building efficiency targets, all proposed in some current and drafted mandates throughout the country.
Unaware of the pending dialogue that would result from NAIOP’s report, I digested the information presented in the study titled “Achieving 30% and 50% over ASHRAE 90.1-2004 in a Low-Rise Office Building .” ConSol , an independent energy modeling firm based in California, prepared the report and analysis for NAIOP using the Department of Energy’s EnergyPlus v2.2 simulation program.
The following parameters were used in ConSol’s analysis:
Project Feature |
Description of Analysis |
Building Type & Area |
Low-Rise Office |
4-Stories |
|
95,000 sf |
|
Class-A |
|
Design Components |
14 ft average Floor Height |
50% Window-to-Wall Ratio |
|
4 ft Sill Height |
|
HVAC System - VAV with Terminal Reheat Gas Fired Boilers |
Under the premise that the building in the modeled case was designed ‘as-is’, the report evaluates common best practice energy enhancements and the associated cost impact and payback period.
The ConSol report published the following results:
Location |
Energy Savings |
First Cost Increase |
Payback Period |
Baltimore, MD |
21.5% |
$165,148 |
11 years |
Chicago, IL |
23% |
$188,524 |
8.8 years |
Newport Beach, CA |
15.8% |
$169,898 |
12.2 years |