Search

Over half of commercial building floor area in the US is served by packaged rooftop units (RTUs). With a typical useful life in the 10-20 years range, RTU replacement is a periodic necessity in commercial buildings and an opportunity for upgrading to higher-efficiency units. We designed a package of energy efficiency measures that can be used in conjunction with an RTU replacement, including advanced controls, high-efficiency low pressure-drop air filters, energy monitoring and, optionally, window films and cool-roofs to reduce loads and size of the replacement RTUs. We conducted side-by-side laboratory testing of the package to evaluate energy savings and thermal comfort relative to an existing building baseline. Daily HVAC energy savings for the RTU replacement package averaged 61% across all seasons. The test data showed that the ASHRAE Guideline 36 controls significantly reduced thermal loads and this was a key contributor to the savings, in addition to the higher efficiency of the RTU itself. The laboratory testing also revealed some challenges with installation and commissioning of Guideline 36. Overall, the results demonstrate that significant savings can be realized in existing office buildings by incorporating relatively low-risk, proven measures in conjunction with an RTU replacement.

Utility incentive programs are an important channel to support the deployment of energy efficiency in buildings. To date, these programs have largely been limited to single-component strategies. However, many utilities are now motivated to identify and develop multi-component system retrofits to achieve deeper energy savings, which are essential to achieving broader energy and greenhouse gas reduction goals in the buildings sector. In this paper we present the energy savings, demand reductions, and cost-effectiveness of 16 systems retrofit packages in six utility regions in the United States. These results are being used by these utilities to inform and develop incentive programs for systems retrofits. Our analysis shows that packages with proven lighting and HVAC measures can provide 5–22% whole building annual energy savings, and 13–22% annual energy costs savings, using utility incentive program baselines (code and existing building). The packages are reasonably cost effective for replace-on-burnout but generally not for a retrofit scenario prior to end of equipment life. Demand response can increase both the energy savings and energy cost savings, further improving the cost effectiveness of these packages. We analyzed the impact of using existing building vs. code baselines for calculating savings, showing that the choice of baseline in developing utility incentive programs has a substantial impact on the attributable energy savings to a program, with significant implications for the overall viability of a program (generally savings against existing building condition are higher and improve project and program cost-effectiveness).

This report is a part of the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) EPIC study Leading in Los Angeles: Demonstrating scalable emerging energy efficient technologies for integrated façade, lighting, and HVAC. The set of technologies are called the Integrated Technologies for Energy-efficient Retrofits (INTER) and are comprised of automated shading products and LED lighting systems with networked luminaire-level sensors and controls. In addition, the project will include control modifications and assessments of HVAC savings. This document includes the test plan and test results for the FLEXLAB testing of the shading and lighting INTER system and related energy use impact. The test plan describes the test objectives and features, test cases, schedule, and measurements. The test results cover system performance in the lab; including lighting and HVAC energy, visual comfort, and thermal comfort.

California’s legislative and regulatory goals for renewable energy are changing the power grid’s dynamics. Increased variable generation resource penetration connected to the bulk power system, as well as, distributed energy resources (DERs) connected to the distribution system affect the grid’s reliable operation over many different time scales (e.g., days to hours to minutes to seconds). As the state continues this transition, it will require careful planning to ensure resources with the right characteristics are available to meet changing grid management needs.Demand response (DR) has the potential to provide important resources for keeping the electricity grid stable and efficient, to defer upgrades to generation, transmission and distribution systems, and to deliver customer economic benefits. This study estimates the potential size and cost of future DR resources for California’s three investor-owned utilities (IOUs): Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E).Our goal is to provide data-driven insights as the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) evaluates how to enhance DR’s role in meeting California’s resource planning needs and operational requirements. We address two fundamental questions:What cost-competitive DR service types will meet California’s future grid needs as it moves towards clean energy and advanced infrastructure?What is the size and cost of the expected resource base for the DR service types?Demand response operates across a range of timescales from transient responses in seconds to long-run shifts in daily behavior, and the value created by DR depends on the timescale of the response. This dynamic necessitated a new framework for potential study analysis, and we developed a supply curve modeling framework to express the availability of system-level grid services from distributed resources, based on large samples of Smart Meter Load Shapes. To facilitate comparisons between the cost and value created from having a diverse set of flexible loads, we created a new DR services taxonomy and an analytic framework that groups these services into four core categories: Shape, Shift, Shed and Shimmy.Shape captures DR that reshapes customer load profiles through price response or on behavioral campaigns—"load-modifying DR"—with advance notice of months to days. Energy Technologies Area 2025 California Demand Response Potential Study 03/01/17 Final Report on Phase 2 Results 1-2Shift represents DR that encourages the movement of energy consumption from times of high demand to times of day when there is a surplus of renewable generation. Shift could smooth net load ramps associated with daily patterns of solar energy generation.Shed describes loads that can be curtailed to provide peak capacity and support the system in emergency or contingency events—at the statewide level, in local areas of high load, and on the distribution system, with a range in dispatch advance notice times.Shimmy involves using loads to dynamically adjust demand on the system to alleviate short-run ramps and disturbances at timescales ranging from seconds up to an hour.

Energy efficiency upgrades to buildings to date through avenues such as utility incentive programs have been largely limited to component-based products (e.g., lamps, RTUs). While some utilities do provide ‘custom’ incentive programs with whole building and system level technical assistance, these programs require deeper levels of analysis, resulting in higher program costs. This results in custom programs being restricted to utilities with greater resources, and are typically applied mainly to large or energy-intensive facilities, leaving much of the market without cost effective access and incentives for these solutions. In addition, with increasingly stringent energy codes, cost effective component-based solutions that achieve significant savings are dwindling.Integrated building systems (e.g., integrated façade, HVAC and/or lighting solutions) can deliver higher savings (Regnier et al. 2017) that translate into large sector-wide savings if deployed at the scale of these programs. However, systems application poses a number of challenges – energy savings assessments are inherently more complex and are not easily suited to the deemed measure model, and implementation of systems can be more disruptive. This paper presents the outcomes of a project to develop validated utility incentive program packages for three specific integrated building systems, in collaboration with ComEd, a consortium of California Public Owned Utilities (CA POUs) (Northern California Power Agency(NCPA) and the Southern California Public Power Authority(SCPPA)), and Xcel Energy (CO, MN). Previous work described the potential for energy savings of these systems at the individual and market level, early test findings for the task-ambient lighting system, and described the work products to develop utility incentive programs (Regnier et al. 2016). This paper presents validated end use energy savings of all three systems showing energy savings of ~20% for automated shading combined with daylight dimming (does not include light fixture retrofit savings); 30-46% for task-ambient lighting systems combined with plug load occupancy controls, depending on technology package and office building size (no daylight dimming impacts); and ~94% in the south-façade daylit zone for workstation specific lighting systems with daylight dimming (including lighting retrofit and task tuning). Using a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reference building model (DOE 2018), this translates to whole building savings of 2-5% (large-medium commercial), 12-23% (large-small commercial), and 13-15% (medium-large commercial) for these systems respectively. Early findings from the utilities in deploying these systems through their incentive programs indicate that deployment methods such as direct install programs might be best suited for these integrated systems. Further, early findings from a scoping study across custom utility programs and federal retrofit programs indicate that component level retrofits are still prevalent even in these programs, pointing towards an opportunity for deeper energy savings deployment. High performance retrofit case studies demonstrate that deeper energy savings is possible through integrated approaches. Market stakeholder interviews indicate however that there is generally a low level of awareness of the potential for energy savings of these three integrated systems.

Most building retrofit projects are still component-based in that they typically address only one piece or type of equipment at a time. Systems-based retrofits that seek to address multiple components in an integrated manner have the potential to provide significantly greater energy savings.Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) partnered with several utilities to develop and evaluate three different integrated retrofit packages involving lighting systems: automated shading with daylightdimming controls, workstation-specific lighting with daylight controls, and task/ambient lighting with plug load occupancy controls. Specifically, our analysis sought to quantify the marginal benefits of these systems (energy savings as well as lighting performance and visual comfort) relative to component based approaches. The analysis was based on a combination of measured performance data from LBNL’s FLEXLAB® test facility and energy simulations. All three systems were compared to a simple fluorescent-to-LED retrofit, which represents the component-based approach. While the simple LED upgrade provides significant lighting energy savings of 63%, the systems yielded energy savings of 81-93%, which equates to additional savings of 49-82% over the simple LED upgrade (Table A-1).1 All systems tested provided satisfactory visual comfort as well, indicating good potential for market acceptance.

Nearly every major U.S. city has committed itself to ambitious climate action goals – for Washington, DC this means a 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2032 and carbon neutrality by 2050. In support of these goals, Washington, DC has passed one of the most aggressive and practical climate action bills in the nation—with the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act, DC became the first city in the U.S. to adopt energy performance standards for existing buildings. DC’s Building Energy Performance Standards (BEPS) require energy efficiency improvements for all commercial and multifamily buildings that do not meet a sector-specific minimum ENERGY STAR score or equivalent metric, with iterative compliance cycles every five years that will accelerate the pace of whole building retrofits. This paper explores this revolutionary policy framework and uses two data analysis projects that DC conducted to evaluate the potential impact of the BEPS and move towards carbon neutrality. First, we analyze the potential energy savings and greenhouse gas reductions, as well as potential cost impacts, from the implementation of a BEPS policy in DC We then examine the role of BEPS in a carbon neutrality strategy, how BEPS savings iterate over time, and what additional existing building improvements will be driven by the gravitational pull of new building codes on median performance. The paper highlights the benefits and limitations of such data-driven approaches to support policy decisions. Finally, we will review ongoing BEPS implementation, including expected policy directions, critical supportive programs, and lessons learned to date.

Increasing concern over higher frequency extreme weather events is driving a push towards a more resilient built environment. In recent years there has been growing interest in understanding how to evaluate, measure, and improve building energy resilience, i.e., the ability of a building to provide energy-related services in the event of a local or regional power outage. In addition to human health and safety, many stakeholders are keenly interested in the ability of a building to allow continuity of operations and minimize business disruption. Office buildings are subject to significant economic losses when building operations are disrupted due to a power outage. We propose “occupant hours lost” (OHL) as a means to measure the business productivity lost as the result of a power outage in office buildings. OHL is determined based on indoor conditions in each space for each hour during a power outage, and then aggregated spatially and temporally to determine the whole building OHL. We used quasi-Monte Carlo parametric energy simulations to demonstrate how the OHL metric varies due to different building characteristics across different climate zones and seasons. The simulation dataset was then used to develop simple regression models for assessing the impact of ten key building characteristics on OHL. The most impactful were window-to-wall ratio and window characteristics. The regression models show promise as a simple means to assess and screen for resilience using basic building characteristics, especially for non-critical facilities where it may not be viable to conduct detailed engineering analysis.

Many US cities are addressing climate change by setting goals to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by a specified amount within a specified time period. In order to achieve these goals, reducing emissions from existing buildings is crucial. Many cities are passing legislation to target existing buildings through benchmarking, auditing, retuning, or energy or emissions performance standards. As cities design legislation, they must consider the timing of the policies, how to prioritize building types and sizes, and how these design decisions will impact the city’s emissions. This paper addresses these questions for one particular US city: Seattle, Washington. A model of Seattle’s building stock was created with benchmarking and tax assessor data. It was then used to predict GHG emissions reductions due to different policy implementations for existing commercial and multifamily buildings. Key findings are: (1) the proposed emissions policy is expected to reduce cumulative emissions from buildings by 19% between 2020 and 2050; (2) delaying the implementation of the policy by five years could limit savings to 12%; and (3) including smaller buildings in the policy could increase savings to 34%. The lessons learned and how this can be used by other cities are discussed.

This report is a part of the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) EPIC study Leading in Los Angeles: Demonstrating scalable emerging energy efficient technologies for integrated façade, lighting, and HVAC. The set of technologies are called the Integrated Technologies for Energy-efficient Retrofits (INTER) and are comprised of automated shading products and LED lighting systems with networked luminaire-level sensors and controls. In addition, the project will include control modifications and assessments of HVAC savings. This document includes the test plan and test results for the FLEXLAB testing of the shading and lighting INTER system and related energy use impact. The test plan describes the test objectives and features, test cases, schedule, and measurements. The test results cover system performance in the lab; including lighting and HVAC energy, visual comfort, and thermal comfort.

Light-emitting diodes (LED) fixtures and lamps have emerged as leading technologies for general illumination and are a well-established energy efficiency retrofit measure in commercial buildings (from around 2% of installed fixtures and lamps in 2013 to 28% by 2020). Retrofit approaches that integrate elements, such as networked controls, daylight dimming, and advanced shade technologies lag in comparison. Integrated retrofits have been shown to increase savings over single end-use retrofits, but are perceived as higher complexity and risk. More validation of integrated lighting system performance is needed. This study presents results from laboratory testing of three packages combining fixtures, networked controls, task tuning, and daylight dimming, advanced shades, and lighting layout changes. We characterize performance in perimeter open-office zones, finding energy savings from 20% for daylight dimming and automated shades (no LED retrofit) to over 70% for LED retrofits with advanced controls and shades or lighting layout changes. We present some implementation details, including lessons learned from installation and commissioning in the laboratory setting. We also discuss cost-benefit analysis approaches for the types of packages presented, including the need to quantify and incorporate energy and non-energy benefits for advanced shades packages, which enhance occupant comfort but add significant cost.

Approximately 40% of the total U.S. office floor space of 1.5 billion sq.m (16 billion sq.ft.) is leased space occupied by tenants. Tenant fit-out presents a key opportunity to incorporate energy efficiency within the real estate business cycle. We designed a package of energy efficiency measures tailored to the scope of a tenant fit-out. This tenant fit-out package (TFP) includes advanced lighting and heating, ventilating and air-conditioning (HVAC) controls as core measures, with ceiling fans, automated shading, and plug load controls as additional optional measures. We conducted laboratory testing of six configurations of the package to evaluate energy savings, indoor environmental quality, and identify installation, commissioning, and operational issues. Combined savings for HVAC, lighting, and plug loads ranged from 33-40%. Lighting savings ranged from 69-83%, and HVAC savings from 20-40%. The laboratory testing also revealed some minor but tractable challenges with installation and commissioning of HVAC controls. Overall, the results demonstrate that significant savings can be realized in existing office buildings by incorporating relatively low-risk, proven measures at the time of a tenant fit-out.

Most building retrofit projects are still component-based in that they typically address only one piece or type of equipment at a time. Systems-based retrofits that seek to address multiple components in an integrated manner have the potential to provide significantly greater energy savings.Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) partnered with several utilities to develop and evaluate three different integrated retrofit packages involving lighting systems: automated shading with daylightdimming controls, workstation-specific lighting with daylight controls, and task/ambient lighting with plug load occupancy controls. Specifically, our analysis sought to quantify the marginal benefits of these systems (energy savings as well as lighting performance and visual comfort) relative to component based approaches. The analysis was based on a combination of measured performance data from LBNL’s FLEXLAB® test facility and energy simulations. All three systems were compared to a simple fluorescent-to-LED retrofit, which represents the component-based approach. While the simple LED upgrade provides significant lighting energy savings of 63%, the systems yielded energy savings of 81-93%, which equates to additional savings of 49-82% over the simple LED upgrade (Table A-1).1 All systems tested provided satisfactory visual comfort as well, indicating good potential for market acceptance.

Energy efficiency upgrades to buildings to date through avenues such as utility incentive programs have been largely limited to component-based products (e.g., lamps, RTUs). While some utilities do provide ‘custom’ incentive programs with whole building and system level technical assistance, these programs require deeper levels of analysis, resulting in higher program costs. This results in custom programs being restricted to utilities with greater resources, and are typically applied mainly to large or energy-intensive facilities, leaving much of the market without cost effective access and incentives for these solutions. In addition, with increasingly stringent energy codes, cost effective component-based solutions that achieve significant savings are dwindling.Integrated building systems (e.g., integrated façade, HVAC and/or lighting solutions) can deliver higher savings (Regnier et al. 2017) that translate into large sector-wide savings if deployed at the scale of these programs. However, systems application poses a number of challenges – energy savings assessments are inherently more complex and are not easily suited to the deemed measure model, and implementation of systems can be more disruptive. This paper presents the outcomes of a project to develop validated utility incentive program packages for three specific integrated building systems, in collaboration with ComEd, a consortium of California Public Owned Utilities (CA POUs) (Northern California Power Agency(NCPA) and the Southern California Public Power Authority(SCPPA)), and Xcel Energy (CO, MN). Previous work described the potential for energy savings of these systems at the individual and market level, early test findings for the task-ambient lighting system, and described the work products to develop utility incentive programs (Regnier et al. 2016). This paper presents validated end use energy savings of all three systems showing energy savings of ~20% for automated shading combined with daylight dimming (does not include light fixture retrofit savings); 30-46% for task-ambient lighting systems combined with plug load occupancy controls, depending on technology package and office building size (no daylight dimming impacts); and ~94% in the south-façade daylit zone for workstation specific lighting systems with daylight dimming (including lighting retrofit and task tuning). Using a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reference building model (DOE 2018), this translates to whole building savings of 2-5% (large-medium commercial), 12-23% (large-small commercial), and 13-15% (medium-large commercial) for these systems respectively. Early findings from the utilities in deploying these systems through their incentive programs indicate that deployment methods such as direct install programs might be best suited for these integrated systems. Further, early findings from a scoping study across custom utility programs and federal retrofit programs indicate that component level retrofits are still prevalent even in these programs, pointing towards an opportunity for deeper energy savings deployment. High performance retrofit case studies demonstrate that deeper energy savings is possible through integrated approaches. Market stakeholder interviews indicate however that there is generally a low level of awareness of the potential for energy savings of these three integrated systems.

California’s legislative and regulatory goals for renewable energy are changing the power grid’s dynamics. Increased variable generation resource penetration connected to the bulk power system, as well as, distributed energy resources (DERs) connected to the distribution system affect the grid’s reliable operation over many different time scales (e.g., days to hours to minutes to seconds). As the state continues this transition, it will require careful planning to ensure resources with the right characteristics are available to meet changing grid management needs.Demand response (DR) has the potential to provide important resources for keeping the electricity grid stable and efficient, to defer upgrades to generation, transmission and distribution systems, and to deliver customer economic benefits. This study estimates the potential size and cost of future DR resources for California’s three investor-owned utilities (IOUs): Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E).Our goal is to provide data-driven insights as the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) evaluates how to enhance DR’s role in meeting California’s resource planning needs and operational requirements. We address two fundamental questions:What cost-competitive DR service types will meet California’s future grid needs as it moves towards clean energy and advanced infrastructure?What is the size and cost of the expected resource base for the DR service types?Demand response operates across a range of timescales from transient responses in seconds to long-run shifts in daily behavior, and the value created by DR depends on the timescale of the response. This dynamic necessitated a new framework for potential study analysis, and we developed a supply curve modeling framework to express the availability of system-level grid services from distributed resources, based on large samples of Smart Meter Load Shapes. To facilitate comparisons between the cost and value created from having a diverse set of flexible loads, we created a new DR services taxonomy and an analytic framework that groups these services into four core categories: Shape, Shift, Shed and Shimmy.Shape captures DR that reshapes customer load profiles through price response or on behavioral campaigns—"load-modifying DR"—with advance notice of months to days. Energy Technologies Area 2025 California Demand Response Potential Study 03/01/17 Final Report on Phase 2 Results 1-2Shift represents DR that encourages the movement of energy consumption from times of high demand to times of day when there is a surplus of renewable generation. Shift could smooth net load ramps associated with daily patterns of solar energy generation.Shed describes loads that can be curtailed to provide peak capacity and support the system in emergency or contingency events—at the statewide level, in local areas of high load, and on the distribution system, with a range in dispatch advance notice times.Shimmy involves using loads to dynamically adjust demand on the system to alleviate short-run ramps and disturbances at timescales ranging from seconds up to an hour.

Retrofitting building systems is known to provide cost-effective energy savings. However, prioritizing retrofits and computing their expected energy savings and cost/benefits can be a complicated, costly, and an uncertain effort. Prioritizing retrofits for a portfolio of buildings can be even more difficult if the owner must determine different investment strategies for each of the buildings. Meanwhile, we are seeing greater availability of data on building energy use, characteristics, and equipment. These data provide opportunities for the development of algorithms that link building characteristics and retrofits empirically. In this paper we explore the potential of using such data for predicting the expected energy savings from equipment retrofits for a large number of buildings. We show that building data with statistical algorithms can provide savings estimates when detailed energy audits and physics-based simulations are not cost- or time-feasible. We develop a multivariate linear regression model with numerical predictors (e.g., operating hours, occupant density) and categorical indicator variables (e.g., climate zone, heating system type) to predict energy use intensity. The model quantifies the contribution of building characteristics and systems to energy use, and we use it to infer the expected savings when modifying particular equipment. We verify the model using residual analysis and cross-validation. We demonstrate the retrofit analysis by providing a probabilistic estimate of energy savings for several hypothetical building retrofits. We discuss the ways understanding the risk associated with retrofit investments can inform decision making. The contributions of this work are the development of a statistical model for estimating energy savings, its application to a large empirical building dataset, and a discussion of its use in informing building retrofit decisions.

Utility incentive programs remain one of the most significant means of deploying commercialized, but underutilized building technologies to scale. However, these programs have been largely limited to component-based products (e.g., lamps, RTUs). While some utilities do provide ‘custom’ incentive programs with whole building and system level technical assistance, these programs require deeper levels of analysis, resulting in higher program costs. This results in custom programs being restricted to utilities with greater resources, and are typically applied mainly to large or energy-intensive facilities, leaving much of the market without cost effective access and incentives for these solutions. In addition, with increasingly stringent energy codes, cost effective component-based solutions that achieve significant savings are dwindling. Building systems (e.g., integrated façade, HVAC and/or lighting solutions) can deliver higher savings that translate into large sector-wide savings if deployed at the scale of these programs. However, systems application poses a number of challenges – baseline energy use must be defined and measured; the metrics for energy and performance must be defined and tested against; in addition, system savings must be validated under well understood conditions. This paper presents a sample of findings of a project to develop validated utility incentive program packages for three specific integrated building systems, in collaboration with Xcel Energy (CO, MN), ComEd, and a consortium of California Public Owned Utilities (CA POUs) (Northern California Power Agency(NCPA) and the Southern California Public Power Authority(SCPPA)). These program packages consist of system specifications, system performance, M&V protocols, streamlined assessment methods, market assessment and implementation guidance.

Catalyzed by recent market, technology, and policy trends, energy data collection in the building industry is becoming more widespread. This wealth of information allows more data-driven decision-making by designers, commissioning agents, facilities staff, and energy service providers during the course of building design, operation and retrofit. The U.S. Department of Energy’s Building Performance Database (BPD) has taken advantage of this wealth of building asset- and energy-related data by collecting, cleansing, and standardizing data from across the U.S. on over 870,00 buildings, and is designed to support building benchmarking, energy efficiency project design, and buildings-related policy development with real-world data. This article explores the promises and perils energy professionals are faced with when leveraging such tools, presenting example analyses for commercial and residential buildings, highlighting potential issues, and discussing solutions and best practices that will enable designers, operators and commissioning agents to make the most of ‘big data’ resources such as the BPD.

The Buildings Performance Database (BPD) includes empirically measured data from a variety of data sources with varying degrees of data quality and data availability. The purpose of the data preparation process is to maintain data quality within the database and to ensure that all database entries have sufficient data for meaningful analysis and for the database API. Data preparation is a systematic process of mapping data into the Building Energy Data Exchange Specification (BEDES), cleansing data using a set of criteria and rules of thumb, and deriving values such as energy totals and dominant asset types. The data preparation process takes the most amount of effort and time therefore most of the cleansing process has been automated. The process also needs to adapt as more data is contributed to the BPD and as building technologies over time. The data preparation process is an essential step between data contributed by providers and data published to the public inthe BPD.

Implementing energy conservation measures in buildings can reduce energy costs and environmental impacts, but such measures cost money to implement so intelligent investment strategies require the ability to quantify the energy savings by comparing actual energy used to how much energy would have been used in absence of the conservation measures (known as the baseline energy use). Methods exist for predicting baseline energy use, but a limitation of most statistical methods reported in the literature is inadequate quantification of the uncertainty in baseline energy use predictions. However, estimation of uncertainty is essential for weighing the risks of investing in retrofits. Most commercial buildings have, or soon will have, electricity meters capable of providing data at short time intervals. These data provide new opportunities to quantify uncertainty in baseline predictions, and to do so after shorter measurement durations than are traditionally used. In this paper, we show that uncertainty estimation provides greater measurement and verification (M&V) information and helps to overcome some of the difficulties with deciding how much data is needed to develop baseline models and to confirm energy savings. We also show that cross-validation is an effective method for computing uncertainty. In so doing, we extend a simple regression-based method of predicting energy use using short-interval meter data. We demonstrate the methods by predicting energy use in 17 real commercial buildings. We discuss the benefits of uncertainty estimates which can provide actionable decision making information for investing in energy conservation measures.

We present a probabilistic approach to designing an indoor sampler network for detecting an accidental or intentional chemical or biological release, and demonstrate it for a real building. In an earlier paper, Sohn and Lorenzetti(1) developed a proof of concept algorithm that assumed samplers could return measurements only slowly (on the order of hours). This led to optimal detect to treat architectures, which maximize the probability of detecting a release. This paper develops a more general approach, and applies it to samplers that can return measurements relatively quickly (in minutes). This leads to optimal detect to warn architectures, which minimize the expected time to detection. Using a model of a real, large, commercial building, we demonstrate the approach byoptimizing networks against uncertain release locations, source terms, and sampler characteristics. Finally, we speculate on rules of thumb for general sampler placement.