Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “building energy data”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

From roads to roofs: How urban and rural mobility influence building energy consumption

In this article, understanding the relationship between travel behavior and building energy use at an urban scale is crucial for developing effective energy management strategies. Mobility patterns significantly impact building occupancy, which in turn affects energy consumption. However, existing methods often focus on individual buildings, whereas geographical influences on energy usage are not adequately examined. This study addresses this gap by using transportation origin-destination (OD) data to estimate building occupancy and energy. The proposed method assigns OD trips from census block groups to the building level, incorporating building, travel survey, and census data to derive building occupancy profiles. This method was applied to urban and rural areas with 4062 buildings in 70 census block groups. We found that the OD-informed occupancy profile exhibits smoother energy consumption patterns compared with that of Department of Energy reference occupancy profiles. Our analysis reveals distinct building energy consumption patterns among groups with long and short commutes, emphasizing the effect of commute times and work schedules on residential energy usage. This framework is useful for practitioners in transportation agencies and utility companies, enabling the estimation of building energy based on mobility patterns. Overall, this study shows the potential of integrating transportation and building energy data to inform cross-sector energy management strategies.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Hardware-Based Emulator with Deep Learning Model for Building Energy Control and Prediction Based on Occupancy Sensors’ Data

Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) is the largest source of residential energy consumption. Occupancy sensors’ data can be used for HVAC control since it indicates the number of people in the building. HVAC and sensors form a typical cyber-physical system (CPS). In this paper, we aim to build a hardware-based emulation platform to study the occupancy data’s features, which can be further extracted by using machine learning models. In particular, we propose two hardware-based emulators to investigate the use of wired/wireless communication interfaces for occupancy sensor-based building CPS control, and the use of deep learning to predict the building energy consumption with the sensor data. We hypothesize is that the building energy consumption may be predicted by using the occupancy data collected by the sensors, and question what type of prediction model should be used to accurately predict the energy load. Another hypothesis is that an in-lab hardware/software platform could be built to emulate the occupancy sensing process. The machine learning algorithms can then be used to analyze the energy load based on the sensing data. To test the emulator, the occupancy data from the sensors is used to predict energy consumption. The synchronization scheme between sensors and the HVAC server will be discussed. We have built two hardware/software emulation platforms to investigate the sensor/HVAC integration strategies, and used an enhanced deep learning model—which has sequence-to-sequence long short-term memory (Seq2Seq LSTM)—with an attention model to predict the building energy consumption with the preservation of the intrinsic patterns. Because the long-range temporal dependencies are captured, the Seq2Seq models may provide a higher accuracy by using LSTM architectures with encoder and decoder. Meanwhile, LSTMs can capture the temporal and spatial patterns of time series data. The attention model can highlight the most relevant input information in the energy prediction by allocating the attention weights. The communication overhead between the sensors and the HVAC control server can also be alleviated via the attention mechanism, which can automatically ignore the irrelevant information and amplify the relevant information during CNN training. Our experiments and performance analysis show that, compared with the traditional LSTM neural network, the performance of the proposed method has a 30% higher prediction accuracy.

Ye, Zhijing↗
DOE OSTI2025

A machine learning method of modern urban building energy modeling: A case study of Chicago

Urban-scale building energy modeling is vital for urban planning. However, it can be challenging to assimilate reliable non-geometry building data for urban-scale modeling without extensive investment. Here, this study introduces a novel approach to developing modern urban-scale building energy stock data using geographic information systems and machine learning algorithms without necessarily requiring pre-supplied non-geometric metadata. The proposed framework integrates building footprint and height data to estimate gross floor areas, and matches each building to a pool of candidate records from ComStock or ResStock—filtered to the same county and ranked by geometric similarity—demonstrate a proof-of-concept case study in Chicago for predicting energy use intensity (EUI) using scalable datasets. The model achieved a mean bias error (MBE) of 0.08 kWh/m² and root mean square error (RMSE) of 14.84 kWh/m² under full metadata input for EUI prediction. With only location inputs, the model captured 69.2 % of EUI within predicted ranges. These results demonstrate the model’s potential to support early-stage urban planning, identify candidates for energy-efficient retrofits. By removing the dependency on detailed pre-surveys or extensive building metadata, the approach overcomes a key barrier in traditional urban-scale building energy modeling, illustrating a pathway toward broader and more cost-effective application, though further multi-city validation and improved treatment of pre-1925 buildings are needed.

Energy Use Intensity↗
DOE OSTI2022

Using Open Data to Characterize Building Stock Trends for Energy and Equity Evaluation

This project provides a methodology for retrieving data from both existing public data and municipal open data sets to characterize changes in the building stock, socioeconomic, demographic, and climate indicators at a neighborhood scale. This methodology forms the basis for a geospatial dashboard to analyze and share the data. The developed methodology may be used to collect data for further energy equity analyses. Additional data sets, such as from other municipalities, may be incorporated in the future to expand the extents of the possible analysis.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

A review of future weather data for assessing climate change impacts on buildings and energy systems

The effectiveness of climate change impact assessments and the development of adaptation strategies depend on the availability of high-quality future weather data. However, significant gaps exist between the needs of the energy research community and the focus of the climate modeling community, primarily due to a historical lack of communication and collaboration between the two groups. Here, to address this issue, this work provides a comprehensive overview of the critical aspects involved in creating future weather data for building and energy system modeling, including emissions scenarios, general circulation models, downscaling methods, categories of future weather data, and uncertainties in climate simulations. Moreover, it critically evaluates the applicability and suitability of various types of future weather data in five key application scenarios: energy use analysis, resilience analysis, HVAC design, utility-scale analysis, and renewable energy analysis. Finally, this work presents recommendations for high-level actions and research directions to foster collaboration between the energy research and climate modeling communities and to promote the integration of future weather data into energy codes and the design practices of buildings and energy systems.

Climate change↗
DOE OSTI2020

Putting Data to Work (Final Technical Report)

The Putting Data to Work project was designed to pilot and summarize the use of building energy performance data to improve energy efficiency program design and delivery in DC and NYC. By doing this, the project aimed to expand the market for energy efficiency in multifamily and commercial buildings by producing a toolkit of resources for other jurisdictions to replicate the successes found in the project cities.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗
DOE OSTI2024

BETTER Together

The Standard Energy Efficiency Data (SEED) and Building Efficiency Targeting Tool for Energy Retrofits (BETTER) platforms are both developed by the Department of Energy and work better together. SEED is a database to manage building characteristics and performance data from a variety of sources. BETTER provides simple energy efficiency measure analyses based on high level data about the building or portfolio of buildings. A demonstration of each platform and their integration will be provided. The inputs for BETTER are building type, floor area, location, utility data, and whether PV shall be included in the analysis. The BETTER analysis can be manually set up through the web application or data can be uploaded with a BuildingSync XML file either directly or through the API. SEED can be the source of this data and the data can be sent to BETTER through the SEED application after the BETTER API token has been entered. The benefit of utilizing SEED is that it has connections to many other sources of data such as ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager, Audit Template, and Salesforce. Therefore, it is likely that a user of SEED will already have the required inputs for BETTER in SEED already and can create BETTER analyses across their whole portfolio in a couple mouse clicks. This is a major time savings and enables decision makers an easy path to identify buildings that should undergo more detailed audits or retrofit pathways.

ASHRAE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Building Performance Database API (BPD API) v2.1

The Building Performance Database (BPD) is the largest publicly-available source of measured energy performance data for buildings in the United States. It contains information about the building's energy use, location, and physical and operational characteristics. The BPD can be used by building owners, operators, architects and engineers to compare a building's energy efficiency against customized peer groups, identify energy efficiency opportunities, and set energy efficiency targets. It can also be used by energy efficiency program implementers and policymakers to analyze energy efficiency features and trends in the building stock. The BPD compiles data from various data sources, converts it into a standard format, cleanses and quality checks the data, and provides users with access to the data in a way that maintains anonymity for data providers. This software is the database and the Application Programming Interface (API). Users can utilize the BPD's data to develop their own applications using the API. Version 2.1 included a major update for multiple years of data and refactoring of code for faster queries.

Mathew, Paul↗
DOE OSTI2021

Utility-scale Building Type Assignment Using Smart Meter Data

United States building energy use accounted for 40% of total energy use, 74% of peak demand, and $412 billion in 2019. Building energy modeling allows researchers to simulate building physics, gain insights into possible energy/demand saving opportunities, and assess cost-effective resilience amidst climate change. Many building features needed to create building energy models are readily available such as 2D footprints and LiDAR (height). A critical feature that is not generally obtainable is the building type. In partnership with a utility, a years worth of real-world, 15-minute electrical use data has been examined. The smart meter data is compared to 97 different prototype building energy models to assign building type. Real-world considerations including data preparation, quality assurance, and handling of missing values for advanced metering infrastructure data are addressed. Euclidean distance for pattern-matching of energy use, dynamic time warping, and time-window statistics with machine learning are compared for determining building type from measured electricity use.

Bass, Brett↗
DOE OSTI2020

Data-driven evaluation of HVAC operation and savings in commercial buildings

Commercial buildings consumed 36% of electricity, or 1.35 trillion kWh, in the United States in 2017, and almost 30% of this energy was wasted. Much of this loss can be attributed to inefficient heating ventilation and air con­ditioning (HVAC) systems. By improving the operational conditions of HVAC, significant savings can be achieved. However, most buildings and building equipment do not use costly sub-meters to monitor and address performance issues, and on-site auditing can be expensive and insufficient. Alternatively in this study, we propose a data-driven method to identify savings opportunities using only whole building meter data and without setting foot in the building. For this purpose, we introduced two algorithms that virtually quantify the value of a thermostat setpoint setback and HVAC rescheduling. Additionally, we developed novel methods for detecting occupancy patterns and quantifying the baseload of the HVAC operation. Using a clustering algorithm, we identified those buildings for which HVAC savings was significant and further categorized the buildings based on their potential for savings. A population study of over 432 commercial buildings demonstrated a median percentage energy savings of 1.6% from a baseload reduction and 2.1% from HVAC rescheduling. Additionally, results indicate that retail buildings have the highest potential for savings among the building types studied.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Model America: Data and Models for every U.S. Building

The 5-year goal of the “Model America” concept was to generate a model of every building in the United States. This data repository delivers on that goal with "Model America v1". Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed the Automatic Building Energy Modeling (AutoBEM) software suite to process multiple types of data, extract building-specific descriptors, generate building energy models, and simulate them on High Performance Computing (HPC) resources. For more information, see AutoBEM-related publications (bit.ly/AutoBEM). There were 125,715,609 buildings detected in the United States. Of this number, 122,146,671 (97.2%) buildings resulted in a successful generation and simulation of a building energy model. This dataset includes the full 125 million buildings. Future updates may include additional buildings, data improvements, or other algorithmic model enhancements in "Model America v2". This dataset contains OSM and IDF zip files for every U.S. county. Each zip file contains the generated buildings from that county. The .csv input data contains the following data fields: 1. ID - the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), generated using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework 2. Centroid - building center location in latitude/longitude (from Footprint2D) 3. Footprint2D - building polygon of 2D footprint (lat1/lon1_lat2/lon2_...) 4. State_abbr - state name 5. Area - estimate of total conditioned floor area (ft2) 6. Area2D - footprint area (ft2) 7. Height - building height (ft) 8. NumFloors - number of floors (above-grade) 9. WWR_surfaces - percent of each facade (pair of points from Footprint2D) covered by fenestration/windows (average 14.5% for residential, 40% for commercial buildings) 10. CZ - ASHRAE Climate Zone designation 11. BuildingType - DOE prototype building designation (IECC=residential) as implemented by OpenStudio-standards 12. Standard - building vintage This data is made free and openly available in hopes of stimulating any simulation-informed use case. Data is provided as-is with no warranties, express or implied, regarding fitness for a particular purpose. We wish to thank our sponsors which include Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD), U.S. Dept. of Energy’s (DOE) Building Technologies Office (BTO), Office of Electricity (OE), Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Update (September 23, 2025): We corrected the ID field in all state-level.csv input files to ensure one-to-one consistency with the corresponding .osm and .idf output files. The schema and file structure are unchanged; only the values in the ID column were modified. No files were added or removed, and the .zip bundles (containing .osm / .idf) are unchanged. The corrected .csv inputs were re-extracted in March 2025 from the original data generated ~ 2021 (Theta supercomputer runs), and published here to align input IDs with model outputs. Update (September 6, 2026): The Model America dataset was updated to replace the previous building ID field with the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework. UBIDs provide standardized, location-based identifiers for individual building footprints and improve interoperability with other building and geospatial datasets. The data files containing the previous building identifiers were updated to include UBIDs. This update standardizes building identification; the underlying Model America building characteristics and energy simulation results were not recomputed as part of this update.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

High-Level Model Articulation with BuildingSync and OpenStudio

The use of the BuildingSync schema for describing the contents of buildings is becoming more common with its recent integration into the Audit Template tool as well as ASHRAE’s Building Energy Quotient (bEQ) web portal. Although BuildingSync was initially created to store and transfer data related to building energy audits (as defined by ASHRAE Standard 211), it has since been expanded to store the data needed to articulate fully defined physics-based building energy models. BuildingSync combined with abstracted high-level input methods defined in OpenStudio’s Standards project and the newly developed BuildingSync gem allows BuildingSync eXtensible Markup Language (XML) (Bray, Paoli, Sperberg-McQueen, Maler, Eve (Sun Microsystems, & Francois, 2008) document to be converted into OpenStudio models. Automatic generation of a building energy model from data collected during an audit 1) eliminates the need to separately generate an energy model, 2) improves consistency between model generation, and 3) simplifies evaluation of various energy efficiency measures. This manuscript will discuss this open-source project, including: development of the validation infrastructure necessary to provide formalized expectations of informational requirements for BuildingSync documents; development of the BuildingSync gem for translation of BuildingSync documents to OpenStudio models as well as example implementations; and finally, the manuscript will elaborate on the advantages and disadvantages of using high-level models generated from BuildingSync as surrogates to detailed models.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Practices for Demonstrating Energy Savings from Commercial PACE Projects

Nearly three-fourths of U.S. states have authorized local governments to use voluntary special assessments on commercial properties to finance energy improvements that boost economic development, create jobs, increase property values and advance energy goals. Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) financing allows building owners to repay the borrowed capital — from private or public sources — over time using their property as security. Berkeley Lab is supporting the Department of Energy’s Commercial PACE Working Group by developing a series of C-PACE issue briefs. The second brief in this series, Practices for Demonstrating Energy Savings from Commercial PACE Projects, looks at common practices for demonstrating energy savings to support state and local governments that sponsor C-PACE programs and want to track their energy impacts. This brief reviews: -The value proposition and trade-offs of conducting energy impact assessments for C-PACE programs; -Methods to quantify energy savings impacts from energy efficiency building improvements; and -Available resources and tools to support energy impact assessments. C-PACE programs may benefit from energy impact assessments for many reasons, including: -Validating the public benefits of the programs -Demonstrating that C-PACE can deliver participant benefits -Illustrating program impacts on public policy goals -Generating data to help improve program performance Many C-PACE programs are collecting data on project energy savings impacts, and these data can be leveraged to further support decision making and program implementation. Potential drawbacks to energy impact assessments may include added cost and burdens on property owners (e.g., the need to collect building energy consumption data). Where these burdens are considerable, they might slow program uptake. State and local governments can balance the benefits of energy impact assessments with the range of costs and accuracy inherent to available assessment methodologies. Additionally, depending on the policy context in the state or local government, a C-PACE program may be able to leverage existing efforts (e.g., building energy benchmarking programs) to reduce impact assessment costs, align with building owner practices and expectations, and efficiently assess program impact.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Quality Control Methods for Advanced Metering Infrastructure Data

While urban-scale building energy modeling is becoming increasingly common, it currently lacks standards, guidelines, or empirical validation against measured data. Empirical validation necessary to enable best practices is becoming increasingly tractable. The growing prevalence of advanced metering infrastructure has led to significant data regarding the energy consumption within individual buildings, but is something utilities and countries are still struggling to analyze and use wisely. In partnership with the Electric Power Board of Chattanooga, Tennessee, a crude OpenStudio/EnergyPlus model of over 178,000 buildings has been created and used to compare simulated energy against actual, 15-min, whole-building electrical consumption of each building. In this study, classifying building type is treated as a use case for quantifying performance associated with smart meter data. This article attempts to provide guidance for working with advanced metering infrastructure for buildings related to: quality control, pathological data classifications, statistical metrics on performance, a methodology for classifying building types, and assess accuracy. Advanced metering infrastructure was used to collect whole-building electricity consumption for 178,333 buildings, define equations for common data issues (missing values, zeros, and spiking), propose a new method for assigning building type, and empirically validate gaps between real buildings and existing prototypes using industry-standard accuracy metrics.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Model America - data and models of every U.S. building

The 5-year goal of the 'Model America' concept was to generate a model of every building in the United States. This data repository delivers on that goal. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed the Automatic Building Energy Modeling (AutoBEM) software suite to process multiple types of data, extract building-specific descriptors, generate building energy models, and simulate them on High Performance Computing (HPC) resources. For more information, see AutoBEM-related publications (bit.ly/AutoBEM). There were 125,714,640 buildings detected in the United States and this dataset contains 122,930,327 (97.8%) buildings which resulted in a successful simulation. Future, annual updates have been proposed that may include additional buildings, data improvements, or other algorithmic enhancements. This dataset of 122.9 million buildings includes: Models (state_county.zip) - OpenStudio (v3.1.0) and EnergyPlus (v9.4) building energy models. Please note that the download requires the free Globus Connect Personal (https://www.globus.org/globus-connect-personal); Each model has approximately 3,000 building input descriptors that can be extracted. Please see the EnergyPlus(v9.4) 2,784-page Input/Output Reference Guide (https://energyplus.net/sites/all/modules/custom/nrel_custom/pdfs/pdfs_v9.4.0/InputOutputReference.pdf) for everything that can be retrieved or simulated from these models. These models were derived from the following metadata, which is not included in this dataset: 1. ID - unique building ID 2. County - county name 3. State - state name 4. CZ - ASHRAE Climate Zone designation 5. Clim_Zone - text label of climate zone 6. est_year - estimated year of construction 7. est_commercial - estimated building type (0=residential, 1=commercial) 8. Centroid - building center location in latitude/longitude (from Footprint2D) 9. Footprint2D - building polygon of 2D footprint (lat1/lon1_lat2/lon2_...) 10. Height - building height (meters) 11. Area2D - footprint area (ft2) 12. BuildingType - DOE prototype building designation (IECC=residential) as implemented by OpenStudio-standards 13. WWR_surfaces - percent of each facade (pair of points from Footprint2D) covered by fenestration/windows (average 14.5% for residential, 40% for commercial buildings) 14. NumFloors - number of floors (above-grade) 15. Area - estimate of total conditioned floor area (ft2) 16. Standard - building vintage. These models are made free and openly available in hopes of stimulating any simulation-informed use case. Data is provided as-is with no warranties, express or implied, regarding fitness for a particular purpose. We wish to thank our sponsors which include Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD), U.S. Dept. of Energy's (DOE) Building Technologies Office (BTO), Office of Electricity (OE), Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). This research used resources of the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility, which is a DOE Office of Science User Facility supported under Contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. Please cite as: New, Joshua R., Adams, Mark, Bass, Brett, Berres, Anne, and Clinton, Nicholas (2021). 'Model America - data and models of every U.S. building. [Data set].' Constellation, doi.ccs.ornl.gov/ui/doi/339, April 14, 2021

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

An overview of data tools for representing and managing building information and performance data

Building information modeling (BIM) has been widely adopted for representing and exchanging building data across disciplines during building design and construction. However, BIM's use in the building operation phase is limited. With the increasing deployment of low-cost sensors and meters, as well as affordable digital storage and computing technologies, growing volumes of data have been collected from buildings, their energy services systems, and occupants. Such data are crucial to help decision makers understand what, how, and when energy is consumed in buildings—a critical step to improving building performance for energy efficiency, demand flexibility, and resilience. However, practical analyses and use of the collected data are very limited due to various reasons, including poor data quality, ad-hoc representation of data, and lack of data science skills. To unlock value from building data, there is a strong need for a toolchain to curate and represent building information and performance data in common standardized terminologies and schemas, to enable interoperability between tools and applications. This study selected and reviewed 24 data tools based on common use cases of data across the building life cycle, from design to construction, commissioning, operation, and retrofits. The selected data tools are grouped into three categories: (1) data dictionary or terminology, (2) data ontology and schemas, and (3) data platforms. The data are grouped into ten typologies covering most types of data collected in buildings. This study resulted in five main findings: (1) most data representation tools can represent their intended data typologies well, such as Green Button for smart meter data and Brick schema for metadata of sensors in buildings and HVAC systems, but none of the tools cover all ten types of data; (2) there is a need for data schemas to represent the basis of design data and metadata of occupant data; (3) standard terminologies such as those defined in BEDES are only adopted in a few data tools; (4) integrating data across various stages in the building life cycle remains a challenge; and (5) most data tools were developed and maintained by different parties for different purposes, their flexibility and interoperability can be improved to support broader use cases. Finally, recommendations for future research on building data tools are provided for the data and buildings community based on the FAIR principles to make data Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Generation and representation of synthetic smart meter data

Advanced energy algorithms running at big-data scale will be necessary to identify, realize, and verify energy savings to meet government and utility goals of building energy efficiency. Any algorithm must be well characterized and validated before it is trusted to run at these scales. Smart meter data from real buildings will ultimately be required for the development, testing, and validation of these energy algorithms and processes. However, for initial development and testing, smart meter data are difficult to work with due to privacy restrictions, noise from unknown sources, data accessibility, and other concerns which can complicate algorithm development and validation. This paper describes a new methodology to generate synthetic smart meter data of electricity use in buildings using detailed building energy modeling, which aims to capture the variability and stochastics of real energy use in buildings. The methodology can create datasets tailored to represent specific scenarios with known truth and controllable amounts of synthetic noise. Knowledge of ground truth also allows the development and validation of enhanced processes which leverage building metadata, such as building type or size (floor area), in addition to smart meter data. The methodology described in this paper includes the key influencing factors of real-world building energy use including weather data, occupant-driven loads, building operation and maintenance practices, and special events. Data formats to support workflows leveraging both synthetic meter data and associated metadata are proposed and discussed. Finally, example use cases of the synthetic meter data are described to illustrate potential applications.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗