According to the EIA, buildings consume nearly 50% of the energy generated in the U.S. and produce 44% of the carbon emissions[1]. Certifications and codes help to drive reductions in the built environment, but as we look to meeting the energy needs of the future, designers can take a leadership role in doing our part for the industry.
Reducing energy use in our buildings can be done in a number of ways, but taking a critical look at the beginning of design allows for maximized impacts. Previously energy modeling was a skill that was reserved for engineers, and often involved complex details and a substantial amount of time. As an alternative, performance based models, where conservation targets are considered as soon as pen hits paper, is gaining popularity.
Building orientation and massing provide important opportunities for reducing energy in early design decisions. While designers often use rules of thumb, modeling allows you to see the direct impacts of adding shading devices or increasing the amount of glazing on a façade. It also becomes a component of the integrative design process, ensuring synergies between building systems are optimized.
Traditional energy modeling requires building improvements in later stages that then compete for priority. Early modeling of energy allows for flexibility and innovation by analyzing the impacts of various design scenarios and learning from each one. Taking it a step further, the process can be enhanced when coupled with benchmarking or Measurement and Verification once a building is completed, allowing the owner to ensure that the building is performing as designed. The analyses can also assist in maximizing daylighting by identifying over and under-lit spaces and priorities the type of shading and glazing needs for each façade. According to recent studies by Harvard School of Public Health, daylight has significant impact in the thinking and performance of students. There is a significant correlation between daylight in classrooms and student performance, particularly in material ready assessments as well as increased alertness and physical activity.
The continuous improvement process allows both the designer and the building to raise the bar of performance and track it over time. The result is schools that save on operation and maintenance costs. According to a survey from Turner Construction, sustainable schools can achieve direct savings of $12 sq. ft. going directly back into the school in the way of energy savings, lowered water costs, improved teacher retention and lowered health costs all for an increased cost of less than 2% more than conventional schools (approximately $3 per square foot) to make them green[2].
[1] U.S. Energy Information Administration (2012).
[2] “2005 Survey of Green Buildings,” Turner Construction. Available at: http:// www.turnerconstruction.com/greenbuildings