Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Impacts of Model Building Energy Codes”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Impacts of Model Building Energy Codes

The Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates national and state-level impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, conducted an assessment of the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. A previous PNNL study evaluated the impact of the Building Energy Codes Program. A 2016 study looked more broadly at overall code impacts and this report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced emissions at the state level and at aggregated levels. In 2021, DOE conducted an interim and limited update to its 2016 study to evaluate potential building code updates using the 2016 methodology. That interim update includes estimated savings resulting from updates to the model energy codes, including the ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (ASHRAE 90.1-2016) and 2019 editions, as well as the 2018 and 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). In 2023, DOE developed a fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2019 and 2021 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, annual floorspace additions, state code adoption dates, and emission factors, among others. This current version is another fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2022 and 2024 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, state code adoption dates, emission factors, and renewable energy contribution among others. Energy codes follow a three-phase cycle that starts with the development of a new model code, proceeds with the adoption of the new code by states and local jurisdictions, and finishes when the new code is implemented and builders, architects, and engineers are required to comply with the new provisions. The development of new model code editions creates the potential for increased energy savings. After a new model code is adopted, potential savings are realized in the field when new buildings (or additions and alterations) are constructed to comply with the new code. The contributions of all three phases are crucial to the overall impact of codes and are considered in this assessment. Figure ES.1 schematically describes the analysis framework. Energy savings are expressed in terms of energy use intensity (EUI) in the figure.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Impacts of Model Building Energy Codes

The Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates state and national impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, assessed the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. The model codes of interest in this report are the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) for residential buildings and ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for commercial buildings. This report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced CO 2 emissions at the state and national levels.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Impacts of Model Building Energy Codes – Interim Update

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates state and national impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, assessed the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. The model codes of interest in this report are the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) for residential buildings and ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for commercial buildings. This report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced CO 2 emissions at the state and national levels.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Model Energy Codes End-Use Opportunity Analysis

Model energy codes (ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and IECC) has significantly impacted programs and policies aimed at improving energy efficiency both in United States and across the globe. Standard 90.1, first published in 1975 (originally referred to as Standard 90) provides minimum energy efficiency guidelines for designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining new construction and renovated buildings. It is updated continuously, with new editions published every 3 years. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) conducts simulated energy and cost savings analysis of model energy codes to determine their expected impact and to track progress toward net-zero goals and efficiency targets. Additionally, the simulation outputs are examined to assess how energy is used across primary systems within prominent U.S. commercial building types to understand how energy is used in each building type at the end-use level and to identify areas for improvements in future code cycles. This end-use opportunity analysis of model energy codes provides ASHRAE technical committees and other interested parties a better understanding of how the Standard affects various building systems and end uses, specifically, those in the Standard that most prominently influence energy efficiency. Additionally, findings provide industry stakeholders guidance in identifying building types and end-uses with the most potential for energy efficiency improvements through energy codes and those that may require beyond code measures to meet energy use reduction targets. This paper summarizes features and functionalities of a webtool created by PNNL to explore and visualize the End-Use opportunity analysis.

ASHRAE 90.1, Energy Codes, Tableau↗
DOE OSTI2024

An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest (Final Technical Report)

The primary goal of the “An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest” project was to improve housing through strengthened building energy code implementation in two states, Colorado and Nevada, leading to greater energy and utility bill savings for households. Colorado is a home rule state. Nevada adopts a statewide code, but cities and counties must also adopt the code, making the state function like a home rule state. To broaden the impact of the project, an additional goal was to share and amplify project experiences, findings, and lessons that can be applied in other states. To achieve these goals, the project’s key objectives were to examine how residential energy codes are implemented in partner states; to use these findings to strengthen codes implementation through enhanced education, training, and outreach; and to enhance energy code technical assistance capabilities in the two partner states. In both partner states, the project led to the creation of a quantitative baseline understanding of compliance with high-impact energy code requirements, such as foundation, wall, and ceiling R-value; window U-factor and SHGC; envelope air tightness; duct tightness; and high-efficiency lighting. It then applied this baseline information to directly inform training in geographic areas with high levels of building and construction activity. The project has placed Colorado and Nevada among 23 states across the country that have conducted a single-family residential field study based on the established U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) methodology since 2014. It has also helped each State Energy Office test models for partnership- and relationship-building among government agencies and key stakeholder groups, including the State Energy Office and relevant code administration and professional licensing agencies, building officials, designers, builders, trades and utilities. At the national level, the project helped educate and inform State and Territory Energy Offices on a replicable methodology to assess energy code construction practices, effective stakeholder engagement strategies, and tailored energy code education and training. These findings are particularly pertinent for home-rule states, such as Colorado and Nevada, which rely on local government awareness and action to advance and implement building energy codes. By raising awareness of code adoption and compliance, this project has helped to equip each partner state with data on code compliance, strategies, education, and partnership models to advance building energy codes. This in turn will have an important impact on new construction practices in Colorado and Nevada, leading to more energy efficient and affordable housing. Currently, more than 62 percent of Colorado’s population lives in one of the 55 jurisdictions that have adopted the 2021 IECC to date, while nearly 95 percent of the state's population lives in one of the 208 jurisdictions that have adopted a code at 2015 IECC levels or higher. In Nevada, the 2018 IECC was adopted by the Governor’s Office of Energy in July 2018. By July 2020, 47 percent of the adopted energy code in the state was 2018 IECC which covers 96.5 percent of Nevada’s population. The training materials funded by this project focus on the 2021 IECC and will continue to be relevant in the two states as additional jurisdictions update their building energy codes.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2022

Guide to Determining Climate Zone by County: Building America and IECC 2021 Updates

This report describes the climate zone designations used by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Building America Program. The report aims to help residential building stakeholders identify the appropriate climate zone designation for each county in the United States, including Hawaii and Alaska. Identifying the correct climate zone is important for many activities including residential construction projects, code compliance, energy analysis and modeling, and other analytical activities where climate zones impact the energy and moisture performance of residential buildings. This report supersedes the previous Building America publication: Guide to Determining Climate Regions by County, published in 2010. This report reflects climate designations used by the International Code Council (ICC) in the 2021 versions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), the International Residential Code (IRC), and other codes produced by ICC. The information provided here and associated data should be used for the most up-to-date information regarding climate zone designations in the United States.

2021 IECC↗
DOE OSTI2024

Measuring Impact: Evaluating Thermal Zoning Simplification on Energy Efficiency Measures Analysis

Building Energy Modeling (BEM) is a versatile tool for designing, retrofitting, ensuring code compliance, obtaining certifications, qualifying for incentives, and enabling real-time building control. However, capturing all the details of building geometry for thermal zoning can be time-consuming, costly, and sometimes computationally challenging. As a result, modelers have been applying zoning simplification based on factors such as space functions and internal loads, as well as relying on their experience and judgment while adhering to zoning rules outlined in industry standards. Despite the prevalence of this common practice, a notable gap exists in the literature regarding studies quantifying the influence of simplified thermal zoning on the evaluation of Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs). Recognizing this gap, this paper seeks to contribute to the field by enhancing the understanding of how the simplification of thermal zoning influences the evaluation of EEMs against a baseline design. The study utilized a medium office prototype model with a detailed floor plan featuring over 20 zones per floor covering diverse functional spaces with varying internal loads and occupancy schedules. A standard thermal zoning strategy outlined in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Appendix G was employed as the simplified zoning method. This strategy condenses the zoning into a core zone and four perimeter zones per floor. It was compared with the detailed zoning approach, which involves one zone per space. Common Energy EEMs, such as enhanced envelope, high-efficiency appliances and equipment, and HVAC controls, were individually implemented and evaluated. The results indicate that the performance comparison between the two zoning methods varies depending on the type of measures considered. Basic measures, such as adding wall insulation, demonstrate similar energy impacts, while advanced HVAC control measures, such as static pressure reset, exhibit a more substantial difference that cannot be overlooked.

Xie, Jiarong↗
DOE OSTI2025

Energy efficiency and thermal resilience analysis for row houses using representative building energy models

Row houses, a prevalent medium-density urban archetype, were popularized during industrial era to accommodate the working class in the U.S. cities. Today, many of these structures are deteriorating, exacerbating the energy cost for residents with limited economic resources. Moreover, many households that lack Air Conditioning (AC) are vulnerable to extreme summer heat, an issue expected to worsen in the future. Energy-efficient retrofits can help mitigate these challenges. However, current literature provides limited insight into how existing building energy codes impact the energy efficiency and thermal resilience of row houses in current and future weather scenarios. This study provides a detailed method to address this gap by employing calibrated representative energy models of row houses as a baseline, and evaluating the annual energy savings and summertime thermal safety improvements from code compliant retrofits under current and future typical weather conditions. Using Baltimore City as a case study, results show that under current weather, retrofitting row houses yields significant energy savings along with notable thermal resilience improvements. The end unit row house realizes higher energy savings, whereas the interior unit experiences greater thermal resilience improvement after retrofitting. In future, retrofitted row houses can still save energy, but residents will face numerous hours of fatal indoor temperatures without AC in summer. Additionally, findings reveal stark zone-wise variations in thermal safety, and elevated humidity risks in certain zones post-retrofit, emphasizing the need for zonal retrofit strategies and better natural ventilation strategies.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Leveraging NREL's ResStock & ComStock Dataset to Evaluate Building Stock Electrification: Preprint

Residential and commercial buildings accounted for 40% of U.S. energy consumption in 2022 and represent a significant opportunity for decarbonization through energy efficiency and electrification, and for grid planning. Building stock energy modeling is a powerful tool that can evaluate what-if scenarios as utilities, municipalities, policymakers, building owners and others work towards equitable building decarbonization and climate goals. This presentation will highlight several high-impact use cases of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)'s highly granular, bottom-up building stock energy modeling tools, ResStock and ComStock. These use cases cover a wide range of project scale, from neighborhood electrification analysis and municipality long-term energy planning, to state energy code development and national policy evaluation. This presentation will showcase specific real-world applications for which ResStock and ComStock have been utilized across the country, including California codes and standards cost-effectiveness analysis, New York City affordable housing electrification cost gap analysis, and California targeted electrification and gas decommissioning analysis. For each use case, this presentation will illustrate how ResStock and ComStock played a crucial role in accurately characterizing regional building stocks, providing discrete and aggregated end-use load shapes, and calculating lifecycle consumption, emissions, and costs for a variety of building electrification strategies and scenarios. Finally, this presentation will demonstrate how the data provided by ResStock and ComStock can help unlock significant outcomes for these use cases, including but not limited to, customer bill impact, incentive and program design, and energy equity analyses.

building stock modeling↗
DOE OSTI2021

Energy-saving potential evaluation for primary schools with occupant-centric controls

Recent studies demonstrated that there is significant energy-saving potential for primary schools, which heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems with occupant-centric control (OCC) is an excellent candidate to save energy. However, such an energy impact has yet to be evaluated for different climate zones as well as different energy code versions, but is critical for technology transfer and deployment. Therefore, this paper conducts comprehensive evaluation on the energy-saving potentials for the primary schools with two advanced OCC strategies: presence-based and counting-based. In this work, ninety-six building energy models with stochastic behavior of occupants are developed and simulated, which consist of two building energy code versions, 16 climate zones, and baseline case (without OCC) and two advanced cases (with OCC). To evaluate the energy saving potentials for OCC, primary schools in the U.S. are used as an example. The results show that there is significant energy-saving potential for primary schools by considering OCC strategies, especially the counting-based case. The energy-saving potential is up to 10.2% for presence-based OCC and 12.41% for counting-based OCC. Furthermore, both climate and code version have a significant impact on energy savings from OCC strategies. The energy-saving potentials vary from 1.79% to 12.41% for different climates and code versions. This evaluation can also contribute to quantify the nationwide energy saving potential for other countries.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2022

SolarAPP+ Pilot Analysis: Performance and Impact of Instant, Online Solar Permitting

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) led a collaborative effort to develop the Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus (SolarAPP+), a no-cost solar permitting software solution to address residential solar photovoltaic (PV) permitting resource constraints and streamline solar adoption processes among authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs). The SolarAPP+ is an online portal that automates permit plan review, enabling an instant permit approval process for code-compliant residential PV systems. Based on national model building, electrical, and fire codes, the SolarAPP+ automatically performs a compliance check of permit inputs against code requirements and produces an inspection checklist that can be used to verify installation practices, workmanship, and adherence to the approved design. NREL conducted a two-phase pilot with five participating AHJs and 16 solar contractors, spanning from November 2020 through December 2021, evaluating the ability of SolarAPP+ to deliver instant permits and its impact on four critical areas within each AHJ: permit review timelines; solar adoption timelines; AHJ time saved; and inspection results. The pilot confirmed that SolarAPP+ reduced permit review times to less than one day, reduced solar adoption timelines by an average of 12 days, saved an estimated 2,067 staff hours, and had comparable inspection results to those found in traditional permitting. The pilot further identified key lessons for improving SolarAPP+, including ways to streamline SolarAPP+ adoption, development of training resources, and expansion of supported products.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Enhancing EnergyPlus capabilities to model dynamic building envelopes using python plugin

Nearly half of the energy consumption in the United States is related to buildings, resulting in an urgent need to develop innovative technologies to improve building energy efficiency. Dynamic building envelopes, comprising switchable insulation and thermal energy storage materials, have been proposed recently as a promising solution to reduce buildings' heating and cooling loads by thermally coupling the indoor environment with the ambient environment when beneficial while decoupling them when outdoor conditions are not favorable. Although various related technologies are still underway, the whole-building energy modeling tools, like EnergyPlus, do not have the capability to simulate the transient and dynamic nature of dynamic envelope materials and components to accurately predict their impact on building energy use. The objective of this study is to formulate a method in EnergyPlus simulation engine to model multilayer envelopes, comprising dynamic building materials with variable thermophysical properties, and discuss the changes made to the program using a Python plugin. Furthermore, the thermal performance of the dynamic envelopes using the proposed method is compared and verified with the results from a well-established commercial code, COMSOL Multiphysics. A parametric assessment is also conducted to evaluate the energy efficiency benefits of dynamic envelopes in a single-family residential building, demonstrating total annual energy savings up to 11.6 %, when a dynamic envelope operates alone, and up to 18.2 % when it is combined with a thin layer of phase change material as a thermal storage medium. Finally, a United States wide energy efficiency assessment is presented to showcase the geographical spread of the energy savings. The method designed and implemented in this study provides the researchers with the ability to implement their dynamic insulation methods in EnergyPlus and evaluate the whole building energy impact.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2021

National Cost-Effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1–2019

The purpose of this analysis is to examine the cost-effectiveness of the 2019 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, which is developed by the ASHRAE Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1, and is the model energy standard for all commercial buildings and multifamily residential buildings over three floors. PNNL analyzed the cost-effectiveness of changes in Standard 90.1-2019, compared to the previous 90.1-2016 edition, as applied in commercial buildings across the United States. In reviewing proposed changes to Standard 90.1, the SSPC considers the cost-effectiveness of individual changes (addenda). Due to the continuous nature of the development process, however, ASHRAE does not evaluate the entire package of addenda from one edition of the standard to the next, which is of particular interest to adopting state and local governments. Providing states with an analysis of cost-effectiveness facilitates a more comprehensive understanding of the impacts associated with updated model energy codes, informs the state decision-making process and its authorities, and ultimately encourages greater adoption of updated of energy codes. This information also informs the development of future editions of Standard 90.1.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

National Cost-effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016

The purpose of this analysis is to examine the cost-effectiveness of the 2016 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE 2016). Standard 90.1 is developed by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. It is the model energy standard for commercial and multi-family residential buildings over three floors (42 USC 6833). PNNL analyzed the cost-effectiveness of changes in Standard 90.1 from 90.1-2013 to 90.1-2016, as applied in commercial buildings across the United States. During the development of new editions of Standard 90.1, the cost-effectiveness of individual changes (addenda) is often calculated to support the deliberations of ASHRAE Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. The ASHRAE process, however, does not include analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the entire package of addenda from one edition of the standard to the next, which is of particular interest to adopting State and local governments. Providing States with an analysis of cost-effectiveness may encourage more rapid adoption of newer editions of energy codes based on Standard 90.1. This information may also inform the development of future editions of Standard 90.1. To establish the cost-effectiveness of Standard 90.1-2016, three main tasks were addressed: (1) Identification of building elements impacted by the updated standard; (2) Allocation of associated installation, maintenance, and replacement costs; and (3) Cost-effectiveness analysis of required changes In addition to installation, maintenance, and replacement costs, energy cost differences were needed to determine cost-effectiveness. The energy costs for each edition of Standard 90.1 were determined previously under the development of Standard 90.1-2016, as described below. The current analysis builds on the previous PNNL analysis (as outlined in Section 5.2) of the energy use and energy cost saving impacts of Standard 90.1-2016 compared to previous editions. The overall energy savings analysis of Standard 90.1 utilized a suite of 16 prototype EnergyPlus building models in 15 climate locations representing all eight U.S. climate zones. Detailed methodology and overall energy saving results from Standard 90.1-2016 are documented in the DOE technical report titled Energy Savings Analysis: ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (DOE. 2018b).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

National Cost-Effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2022

The purpose of this analysis is to examine the cost-effectiveness of the 2022 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, which is developed by the ASHRAE Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1 and is the model energy standard for all commercial buildings and multifamily residential buildings over three floors. PNNL analyzed the cost-effectiveness of changes in Standard 90.1-2022, compared to the previous 90.1-2019 edition, as applied in commercial buildings across the United States. In reviewing proposed changes to Standard 90.1, the SSPC considers the cost-effectiveness of individual changes (addenda). Due to the continuous nature of the development process, however, ASHRAE does not evaluate the entire package of addenda from one edition of the standard to the next, which is of particular interest to adopting state and local governments. Providing states with an analysis of cost-effectiveness facilitates a more comprehensive understanding of the impacts associated with updated model energy codes, informs the state decision-making process and its authorities, and ultimately encourages greater adoption of updated energy codes. This information also informs the development of future editions of Standard 90.1.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Modeled Results of Four Residential Energy Efficiency Measure Packages for Deriving Advanced Building Construction Research Targets

The Advanced Building Construction (ABC) Initiative from the U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Office is working to accelerate industrialized construction innovations for decarbonizing buildings. To inform performance and cost targets for research under the ABC Initiative, this analysis used the ResStock™ tool to evaluate the energy savings, utility bill impacts, and carbon emissions impacts of four simulated upgrade packages with specific target performance levels on a large sample of residential dwelling units (approximately 550,000) representative of the U.S. housing stock.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

ResStock: Annual Baseline Results with Component Loads

The ResStock Analysis Tool was developed by NREL with support from the U.S. Department of Energy to provide a new approach to large-scale residential analysis by combining large public and private data sources, statistical sampling, detailed sub hourly building simulations, and high-performance computing. This combination achieves unprecedented granularity and accuracy in modeling the diversity of the housing stock and the distributional impacts of building technologies in different communities. The annual baseline energy results from a national-scale ResStock run use typical meteorological year 3 (TMY3) files for energy simulations. Results include heating and cooling loads for individual components of each building. Component loads describe the heating/cooling load that can be attributed to specific elements of a home, such as heat transfer through walls or internal gains. Additionally, these results include the standard ResStock outputs for housing characteristics and numerous energy outputs by end-use and fuel. A snapshot of the ResStock version used to produce this data, including a configuration file for the run can be found using the Source Code resource link.

Array↗