Zero Energy Homes

Opportunities for
Energy Savings:

Defining the
Technology Pathways
through Optimization
Analysis
Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy
Building Technologies Program

NREL Energy Analysis Seminar

December 11, 2003

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1801 K Street, NW
Washington D.C. 20006

www.navigantconsulting.com
Today’s Agenda

1 Introduction

2 Systematic Approach

3 Model Description

4 Optimization Analysis

5 Technology Pathways

6 Planning and Additional Analysis

2
Today’s Agenda Introduction

1 Introduction

2 Systematic Approach

3 Model Description

4 Optimization Analysis

5 Technology Pathways

6 Planning and Additional Analysis

3
Introduction Zero Energy Homes Concept

Zero Energy Homes (ZEH) are not a new concept and have been successfully
demonstrated in many applications and climates through unique, potentially
costly designs.

4
Introduction ZEH Pathways

In order for ZEH to be widely embraced by the home building community, a

variety of affordable design solutions are necessary for many applications and
climates.

Leading to the question: What are the affordable technology pathways to

achieving ZEH in each application and climate?
5
Introduction Optimization Analysis

One method to identify the technology pathways is to evaluate various

technologies by choosing those that can achieve zero energy performance for
the least installed cost (termed optimization).

6
Today’s Agenda Systematic Approach

1 Introduction

2 Systematic Approach

3 Model Description

4 Optimization Analysis

5 Technology Pathways

6 Planning and Additional Analysis

7
Systematic Approach Typical Models

One typical approach for assessing the cost and benefits of technologies is
through simulation models.

Typical Model Features Typical Model Methodology

• Individual house approach Baseline

Model
• Whole-building design
Strategy 1
• Weather and other unknowns are simulated

Yes No
• User applies an energy-saving strategy and
runs the simulation
Strategy 2 Strategy 2
• Many times, trial and error method to find most
optimal combination of energy-saving Yes No Yes No

strategies

8
Systematic Approach Typical Process

To identify the technologies that can achieve a desired performance at a

reasonable cost, the user must apply them one at a time to the baseline.

1 2 3
Technology Performance and
Building Description
Pathway Cost Savings

• User models the • User modifies original • User observes

building by entering in building design by changes in building
design characteristics. adding the cost and performance.
technology.

This process can be time-consuming and the results could be less than
optimal.

9
Systematic Approach Optimization Model

From an R&D planning standpoint, technology pathways for achieving a

desired performance can be assessed accurately and more efficiently through
an optimization model.

Optimization Model Features Optimization Model Methodology

• Individual house approach

Baseline
Model
• All energy end uses are evaluated
simultaneously
Strategy 1

• User has flexibility to change energy-saving

strategies Yes No

• Potentially easier to model research and

Strategy 2 Strategy 2
development technologies

• Uses linear programming to solve for the

Yes No Yes No
optimal combination of strategies

1
0
Systematic Approach Whole House Design

The optimization methodology was first applied to single-family detached

homes, where a systematic approach was taken to model technologies and
their interactions.

1
1
Systematic Approach Whole House Components

To encompass aspects of a newly constructed home, the model was designed

to account for envelope, equipment, and solar components.
Envelope

Solar

Equipment

1
2
Systematic Approach Optimization Process

The user simply enters the desired total energy use and the model returns the
optimal portfolio of building technologies for saving energy and cost.

Constraint Result

Optimal Portfolio of
Target Total Energy Use
Building Technologies

1
3
Systematic Approach Optimal System

The model evaluates various components simultaneously using linear

programming to choose the optimal system of technologies.

Energy Use

Optimal Portfolio

Target

Minimize Cost

Cost

1
4
Today’s Agenda Model Description

1 Introduction

2 Systematic Approach

3 Model Description

4 Optimization Analysis

5 Technology Pathways

6 Planning and Additional Analysis

1
5
 Model Description Model Design

The model was created through three steps to characterize the prototypes,
technologies, and interactions.
Building Loads Technology Technology Outputs
Characteristics Interactions
EIA Data, Building
Envelope Load
America, DOE
Contribution
Appliance
Factors
Standards

Optimized
Data Inputs/Assumptions
Analysis Portfolio of
Spreadsheet
spreadsheets Technology
Options

Includes
•16 cities Includes
•Cost Includes
•Heating/Cooling Includes •Lowest First Cost for
Loads •Typical Size •Interaction Equations
•Efficiency Target Consumption
•From Residential •Optimization Algorithms •Can be optimized for
Heating and Cooling •Annual Consumption
other constraints (I.e.
Loads Component Estimates
LCC, etc…)
Analysis J. Huang et
al, LBNL 1998 1
6
Model Description Building Loads

Previous studies using building models have already examined the various
component building loads, which were utilized in the model.

6 By Region (City)
New England
Mid-Atlantic
East North Central
5
Component Loads (quads)

West North Central

South Atlantic
West South Central
4 Mountain
Pacific North
Pacific South
3

By Type
2 Single-Family Detached
Single-Family Attached
Mobile
1 Multi-Family

By Vintage
0 Pre-1950s
f 1950-1979
d e p r r fl ll
i re opl qui o la loo In Wa oo dow 1980-1989
u S F R Post 1989
eq Pe E
W
in
R
y
e rg
En Energy Gained Energy Lost
e at
H Source: Residential Heating and Cooling Loads Component Analysis J.
Huang et al, LBNL 1998
1
7
Model Description Technology Characteristics

Next, the technologies were added to the model and each with three possible
cases: baseline, best available, and maximum technology.

Baseline Best Available Maximum

Typical Installed Highest Efficiency on Highest Efficiency
Efficiency the Market Possible

Equipment Efficiency Constraints and Installed Costs

Technology Equipment Value Units Baseline Best Available Maximum

Heating Gas Furnace Efficiency AFUE 80 96 150

    Installed Cost $ 1300 1800 5398

Cooling Central A/C Efficiency SEER 10 18.6 20

    Installed Cost $ 2080 3500 3809

Heat Pump Electric Heat Pump Efficiency HSPF 6.8 9.8 10

  Installed Cost $ 2930 5600 5847

Source: Residential Optimization Model Version 5.4, NCI

1
8
Model Description Technology Interactions

Finally, the technology interactions were built into the spreadsheet.

1
9
Model Description Example

As an example, I would like to walk through the potential steps in our

optimization analysis.

Detached Single-Family House

In Atlanta

ILLUSTRATIVE
2
0
Model Description Setting Target

The user begins by entering in the Target Total Energy Use, which for the
Atlanta prototype is 90 MBtus.

Constraint

Target Total Energy Use

90 MBtus

ILLUSTRATIVE
2
1
Model Description Running Model

Next, the user runs the model to get the lowest-cost portfolio of building
technologies for achieving a Total Target Energy Use of 90 MBtus.

Output
Inputs

Optimal Portfolio of
Building Technologies

ILLUSTRATIVE

2
2
 Model Description Portfolio Results

Finally, the user applies the selected portfolio to transform their Atlanta home
into a house that meets both their performance and affordability goals.

HVAC Appliances Building Envelope

Water
Heating Cooling Lighting Refrigerator Washer Dishwasher Walls Roofs Windows Foundation Insulation
Heating

Electric Electric 2X10

Gas Incandescent Electric Electric Electric 2X4 Wood Aluminum Slab 2X4 Wood
Heat Pump Heat Pump Wood

7.0 14 0.60 60 W
ILLUSTRATIVE361 0.9 .031 Siding R-30 2 panes R-5 R-15

2
3
Today’s Agenda Model Description

1 Introduction

2 Systematic Approach

3 Model Description

4 Optimization Analysis

5 Technology Pathways

6 Planning and Additional Analysis

2
4
Optimization Analysis 40 and 50 Percent Energy Savings

The evaluation of best available technologies revealed that the technology

pathways for achieving 40 and 50 percent energy savings already exist and are
available on the market today for all the climate regions.
National Percentage Energy Savings

2
5
Optimization Analysis 70 Percent Energy Savings

In the maximum technology scenario, installing emerging technology

pathways in new homes reduced energy requirements by 69 percent on
average for all climate regions.
National Percentage Energy Savings

2
6
Optimization Analysis 40 to 70 Percent Energy Savings Cost

Though many of the technologies exist or are currently being developed to

reach 70 percent energy savings, they are too expensive to be accepted into the
market and achieve the desired level of energy performance.
Additional Installed Cost of Energy Saving Technologies
$18,000
$16,000
$14,000
$12,000
$10,000
$8,000
$6,000
$4,000
$2,000
$0
Severe Cold Mixed Hot Humid Hot Dry Average
Cold Humid

40% Reduction 50% Reduction 70% Reduction

Therefore, research and development for lower cost, more efficient

technologies is needed to reach the ZEH future.
2
7
Optimization Analysis Technology Mix

Energy efficiency through better equipment and buildings can only provide
69% energy savings, while renewable energy supplies are needed for the
remaining 31% to reach the zero energy level.

69%
31%

Increased Equipment Example: Solar Thermal :

Baseline 4.8 SEF
Efficiency
PV: 3.5 kW

2
8
Today’s Agenda Technology Pathways

1 Introduction

2 Systematic Approach

3 Model Description

4 Optimization Analysis

5 Technology Pathways

6 Planning and Additional Analysis

2
9
Technology Pathways Portfolios

Since initial cost is a primary driver to market acceptance, the portfolio of

technologies that could achieve zero energy performance for the least potential
installed cost premium was selected for each climate.
Technology Severe Cold Cold Mixed Hot-Humid Hot-Dry

Photovoltaic 4.81 kW 4.67 kW 3.87 kW 2.30 kW 1.88 kW

42% load 44% load 65% load 100% load 100% load
Solar Thermal Space/Water Heating
reduction reduction reduction reduction reduction

Lighting 100 L/W 100 L/W 100 L/W 100 L/W 100 L/W

Above 2.0 Above 2.0 2.0 SEF 2.0 SEF 2.0 SEF
Water Heating SEF solar SEF solar solar solar solar
thermal Thermal Thermal Thermal Thermal

0.10 U-Value 0.10 U-Value 0.10 U-Value 0.10 U-Value 0.10 U-Value
Windows
0.38 SHGC 0.18 SHGC 0.18 SHGC 0.18 SHGC 0.18 SHGC

Above 10.0 Above 10.0

9.9 HSPF, 7.2 HSPF, 6.8 HSPF,
Space Heating HSPF, 140 HSPF, 140
123 AFUE 89 AFUE 80 AFUE
AFUE AFUE

50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

reduction in reduction in reduction in reduction in reduction in
Appliances small small small small small
appliance appliance appliance appliance appliance
loads loads loads loads loads

3
0
Technology Pathways Optimal Efficiency Targets

From the regional portfolios, the optimal efficiency targets were identified and
the technologies can be developed that will meet these needs in all the
climates.
Technology Severe Cold Cold Mixed Hot-Humid Hot-Dry

400 kWh/yr 400 kWh/yr 400 kWh/yr 450 kWh/yr 500 kWh/yr
Refrigerator Refrigerator Refrigerator Refrigerator Refrigerator

Appliances 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.0 3.9

cycle/kWh cycle/kWh cycle/kWh cycle/kWh cycle/kWh
Clothes Clothes Clothes Clothes Clothes
Dryer Dryer Dryer Dryer Dryer

0.023 u- 0.023 u- 0.033 u- 0.058 u- 0.060 u-

Walls
value value value value value

Ducts 5% leakage 5% leakage 5% leakage 5% leakage 5% leakage

0.033 u- 0.037 u- 0.047 u- 0.047 u- 0.064 u-

Foundation
value value value value value

0.025 u- 0.025 u- 0.028 u- 0.031 u- 0.033 u-

Roof
value value value value value

Space Cooling 12.0 SEER 12.0 SEER 12.2 SEER 13.3 SEER 16.8 SEER

3
1
Today’s Agenda Planning and Additional Analysis

1 Introduction

2 Systematic Approach

3 Model Description

4 Optimization Analysis

5 Technology Pathways

6 Planning and Additional Analysis

3
2
Planning and Additional Analysis Planning

The optimization model was created as a planning tool and has already been
used to help guide DOE’s Multi-Year Program Plan (MYPP).

Building
Technologies
Program
Research, Development and
Demonstration Plan
Planned program activities for 2003-2010

DRAFT November 26, 2003

3
3
Planning and Additional Analysis Technical Needs

Moving to ZEH will require significant technical advances to meet

performance and cost targets.

Cost
Today's Costs

Current Major Technical

Technology and Advances and Cost
Cost Reduction Reduction R&D
R&D

40% Savings Target Costs

100% 50% 0%
Energy Use (ZEH)
3
4
Planning and Additional Analysis Additional Benefits

The optimization model presents additional benefits for assessing building

technologies that typical simulation models do not offer.
• Multiple strategies allowed
• Future technologies accepted
Inputs

• Performance minimized
• Cost minimized
Optimization • Performance specified at onset

• Potential technology bundles defined

Results

3
5
Planning and Additional Analysis Additional Analysis

With its functionality, the optimization model will continue to support the
development of technology pathways that will enable ZEH.

• Further analysis will be used to evaluate new technologies as well as

construction techniques ability to contribute to ZEH.
• Additional analysis will be used to identify the performance and cost
requirements of the necessary control systems.
• As cost data becomes available, will continue to update and improve.

3
6
Planning and Additional Analysis Conclusions

While achieving ZEH is possible, it will require significant research and

development, especially with regard to installed cost.

• As the cost and performance of these technologies improve, technology

integration becomes extremely critical to reaching ZEH.
• In order to reach extremely low levels of energy use, a large number of
system, or “whole building”, interactions must be exploited (I.e. combination
appliances/equipment).
• Moving to large scale ZEH will require breakthroughs in renewable
generation, and conservation technologies on both the performance and cost
attributes.

3
7