Building Simulation

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 117–124 | Cite as

Assessment of energy savings potential from the use of demand controlled ventilation in general office spaces in California

Research Article/Building Thermal, Lighting and Acoustics Modeling

Abstract

A prototypical office building meeting the prescriptive requirements of the 2008 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) was used in EnergyPlus simulations to calculate the energy savings potential of demand controlled ventilation (DCV) in five typical California climates per three design occupancy densities and two minimum ventilation rates. The assumed minimum ventilation rates in offices without DCV, based on two different measurement methods employed in a large survey, were 38 and 13 L/s per occupant. The results of the life cycle cost analysis show DCV is cost effective for office spaces if the typical minimum ventilation rate without DCV is 38 L/s per person, except at the low design occupancy of 10.8 people per 100 m2 in climate zones 3 (north coast) and 6 (south coast). DCV was not found to be cost effective if the typical minimum ventilation rate without DCV is 13 L/s per occupant, except at high design occupancy of 21.5 people per 100 m2 in climate zones 14 (desert) and 16 (mountains). Until the large uncertainties about the base case ventilation rates in offices without DCV are reduced, the case for requiring DCV in general office spaces will be a weak case. Under the Title 24 standard office occupant density of 10.8 people per 100 m2, DCV becomes cost effective when the base case minimum ventilation rate is greater than 42.5, 43.0, 24.0, 19.0, and 18.0 L/s per person for climate zones 3, 6, 12, 14, and 16, respectively.

Keywords

building simulation building energy standard demand controlled ventilation energy savings 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ASHRAE (2007). ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007: Ventilation for acceptable indoor air quality. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers.Google Scholar
  2. California Energy Commission (CEC) (2008). California building energy efficiency standards for residential and nonresidential buildings, CEC-400-2008-01-CMF.Google Scholar
  3. Carpenter SE (1996). Energy and IAQ impacts of CO2-based demand-controlled ventilation. ASHRAE Transactions, 102(2): 80–88.Google Scholar
  4. Deru M, Torcellini P (2007). Source energy and emission factors for energy use in buildings, Technical report NREL/TP-550-38617.Google Scholar
  5. Eley Associates and New Building Institute (2002). Utility Cost Forecasts: Years 2005 Through 2035.Google Scholar
  6. Emmerich SJ, Persily AK (2001). State-of-the-art review of CO2 demand controlled ventilation technology and application, NISTIR 6729. U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology.Google Scholar
  7. Energy Information Administration (EIA 2003). Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey.Google Scholar
  8. Fisk WJ, Almeida AT (1998). Sensor-based demand-controlled ventilation: A review. Energy and Buildings, 29: 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. International Energy Agency (IEA 1990). Demand-Controlled Ventilating Systems: State of the Art Review.Google Scholar
  10. Persily AK, Gorfain J (2008). Analysis of ventilation data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Building Assessment Survey and Evaluation (BASE) Study, NISTIR-7145-Revised. U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology.Google Scholar
  11. Schell MB, Turner SC, Shim RO (1998). Application of CO2-based demand-controlled ventilation using ASHRAE Standard 62: optimizing energy use and ventilation. ASHRAE Transactions, 104(2): 1213–1225.Google Scholar
  12. Seppanen O, Fisk WJ (2002). Association of ventilation system type with SBS symptoms in office workers. Indoor Air, 12: 98–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Taylor Engineering (2002). Demand controlled ventilation-Measure analysis for Title 24-2005.Google Scholar
  14. Torcellini P, Deru M, Griffith B, Benne K, Halverson M, Winiarski D, Crawley D (2008). DOE commercial building benchmark models. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Conference paper NREL/CP-550-43291.Google Scholar
  15. U.S. Census Bureau (2009). Statistical abstract of the United States-2009. U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Tsinghua University Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Energy Technologies DivisionLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations