PHIUS Senior Scientist Graham Wright and Certification Manager Lisa White answer questions that were submitted during and after the live PHIUS+ 2018 Webinar on November 8, 2018.
You can view a recording of the webinar at the PHIUS.org site.
*Note: Some questions have been edited for publication
Q: Has PHIUS started to look at overall GWP in the materials used to make these high performance buildings? To save the balance of the climate, reducing our emissions in the next 20 years is critical. Lots of XPS and spray foam make a low energy building but don’t do anything to help our climate goals.
A: The short answer is yes. We do have a GWP impact calculator for insulation. Its use is not required for project certification but we encourage it when we see large areas of XPS or SPF proposed. Our product certification program for construction systems has a requirement for a sustainability or health certification; there are several options recognized.
Q: Can you explain the exuberance concept?
A: We remain enthusiastic about the “tiny heating system” / “tiny heating bill” idea.
Q: Thanks for including Quebec Province! I believe in 2015+, all of North America was calculated according to a blanket value for cleanliness of the grid. Is 2018 adapted to different grids, and how do you deal with Quebec’s very cheap and clean hydroelectricity? Renewables are a tough sell here. Zero government incentives and at 7 cents/kWh, our energy costs would have to more than treble in order to make PV make financial sense.
A: In the standard-setting study itself we used the same factor all the time, but because the buildings were (almost) all electric, it canceled out. The PV generation is multiplied by the same factor as the usage, so source net zero is achieved with the same size PV array as for site net zero.
The philosophy is that CO2 emissions anywhere affect everyone everywhere. We all share one atmosphere, so by a principle of solidarity we should really use the world average source energy factor for electricity. That is, people with clean grids do not get to play “we’ve got ours” and use more energy. Even if your local grid is clean we want to drive additional action such as REC purchases that fund new clean energy projects. In certification we do allow the use of national averages, so we actually just request solidarity at the national level. Canada has a cleaner grid than the US overall, and thus Canadian projects will not have to take as many measures for net source energy reduction. The source energy factor for electricity in Canada is 1.96, whereas it is 2.8 for the US.
The electricity cost does affect some of the space conditioning criteria because higher energy prices justify more conservation measures and thus tighter targets. We calculate this with state-by-state averages, so Quebec projects will have less stringent targets than neighbors in Maine and Vermont.
Q: The word “townhouse” usually means a single-family building, but you seem to be using it differently.
A: The individual dwelling units are “single-family, attached”. That is, they share walls but not floor/ceiling. Speaking loosely, the whole row of attached units is the Townhouse, and the study building is 8 or 16 attached units.
Q: Is the mandatory minimum for window upgrades done because it wouldn’t be cost effective otherwise?
A: Yes. Window costs have come down but this still had to be forced in most cases. The starting points were still “in the money” though. There were a few times when the optimizer bought them on its own, but it took a long heating season and high energy price to motivate it.
Q: Is this modeled EUI directly from WUFI Passive in the “Modeled vs. Measured” slide?
A: Yes, the WUFI Passive energy model used for certification.
Q: Do the new non-residential commissioning requirements apply to the common areas of residential buildings or only to all non-residential buildings?
A: TBD. Our current definition (for source energy target purposes) hinges on whether the spaces serve outside clients / customers or just the residents.
Q: Are you considering using the last 5 years of climate data vs ASHRAE to deal with global weirdness?
A: No, but we are working on future climate data for 2090 as an informational resource.
Q: Any comments on using low-iron glass (easily found in EU / just starting to appear in US)? Does the visible transmittance increase relative to ordinary US glass (which has a green tint to natural light)?
A: Alpen for a while had a low-iron glass option in their certified products, but they discontinued it.
Q: Instead of ignoring PV in competing with efficiency measures, why not look at PV with storage for the costs? This may not take care of seasonal differences, but it would take care of daily or weekly changes.
A: We may have have explored it if that was an option in BEopt, but it isn’t yet. Our current thinking is that what batteries do for you depends, in normal operation, on what the time-of-use rate structure looks like, and they are also good for you in outage situations. We are working on a calculation protocol for outages and waiting for utilities or other researchers to converge on time-of-use rate structure(s).
Q: Is there an ASHRAE 55 comfort analysis or PMV for PHIUS+?
A: The new window comfort calculator is based on relatively recent research on Predicted Percentage Dissatisfied specifically for draft at the ankle – it doesn’t just hark back to the PMV/PPD that was determined in 1970.
I (Graham) also wrote a paper for the 2016 conference looking at the radiant temperature effect of windows on comfort.
In certification we mostly take the same kind of simple view as in building code, e.g., “thou shalt maintain a dry bulb temperature set point of X and Y”. Sophisticated comfort analyses are more appropriate for workplace and nonresidential cases where clothing and metabolic profiles of occupants can be pinned down (as required by ASHRAE 55), and one might not have to worry so much about frail or sensitive occupants.
Comment: Adaptation is why I pursued CPHC in the first place!
Graham Wright: Thanks! Lisa presented on passive survivability at the Boston conference, and we will have more to say about this in the future.
Q: How does the new standard accommodate variable occupancy patterns/equipment usage in non-residential buildings?
A: With respect to the performance targets, as a first step, we will allow two different occupancies to be used to determine the annual demand targets vs. peak loads. Also, we can develop custom criteria for unusual situations (additional fee applies).
With respect to energy modeling protocol, it is already required to enter patterns for occupancy, ventilation and lighting, but this is mostly about getting the annual total energy right for source energy limit purposes.
Q: Please define HDD65, IGA, CDD50, TCD, IGCL and DDHR.
A: HDD65 = Heating degree-days, base 65 F;
IGA = Solar Irradiance, global, annual;
CDD50 = Cooling degree-days, base 50 F;
TCD = Temperature, cooling design day;
IGCL = Irradiance, global, cooling load design condition;
DDHR = Dehumidification design humidity ratio.
Q: If a project is considering registering under either 2015 or 2018, can we register under 2015 then change to 2018 (as circumstances change) without an additional registration fee?
A: Yes, you can always pursue a newer version of the standard. You are not able to pursue older versions if the contract date is later than the last day to submit under that older standard. In order to register for PHIUS+ 2015, the contract must be submitted before April 1, 2019.
Q: Are there updates to WUFI to accommodate the 2018+ standard? And when will it be available?
A: Yes, the next version of WUFI Passive will be released by the end of 2018. We will notify all of PHIUS’ mailing list.