Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “energy conservation code”

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 OSTI2021

National Cost-Effectiveness of the Residential Provisions of the 2018 IECC

As part of the U.S. Department of Energy Building Energy Codes Program's support for the development and implementation of model building energy codes and standards for new residential buildings, DOE analyzes each new edition of the International Energy Conservation Code to assess its cost effectiveness relative to the prior edition. This report estimates the incremental cost to comply with the 2018 IECC relative to the 2015 IECC, the associated energy savings, and the life-cycle cost savings.

2018 iecc↗
DOE OSTI2024

Methodology for Evaluating Energy Savings, Cost-Effectiveness, and Societal Impacts of Commercial Energy Code Changes

This document lays out the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) methodology for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of energy code and standard proposals and editions. The evaluation is applied to new provisions or editions of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and the International Energy Conservation Code. The methodology follows standard lifecycle cost (LCC) economic analysis procedures. A cost-effectiveness evaluation requires three steps: 1) evaluating the energy and energy cost savings of code changes; 2) evaluating the incremental and replacement costs related to the changes; and 3) determining the cost-effectiveness of energy code changes based on those costs and savings over time.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Demand Response in Residential Energy Code: Technical Brief

As buildings account for over 75% of U.S. electricity use, effectively managing their loads can greatly facilitate the transition towards a clean, reliable grid. Grid-interactive efficient buildings (GEBs) combine efficiency and demand flexibility with smart technologies and communication to provide occupant comfort and productivity while serving the grid as a distributed energy resource (DER). In turn, GEBs can play a key role in ensuring access to an affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern U.S. electric power system. Their national adoption could provide $\$$100-200 billion in U.S. electric power system cost savings over the next two decades. The associated reduction in CO 2 emissions is estimated at 6% per year by 2030 (DOE 2021). Building codes represent standard design practice in the construction industry and continually evolve to include advanced technologies and innovative practices. Historically, national model energy codes establish minimum efficiency requirements for new construction (ICC 2020). Expanding codes to support GEB capabilities is a pivotal step towards realizing demand flexibility in support of a clean grid by addressing capabilities to improve interoperability between smart building systems, the grid, and renewable energy resources. Realizing GEBs requires buildings with automated demand response (DR) capabilities that enable standardized communication with or control of, subject to explicit consumer consent, energy smart appliances or home energy management systems. This is achieved through direct or indirect (i.e., via an aggregator) communication between appliances and the electric grid. Energy codes can also support DR communication standardization and advance the deployment of building-integrated DERs such as energy storage, generation, and electric vehicles (EVs). Incorporating automated DR capabilities in energy codes provides many benefits to the consumers. Specifically, it aligns building electric load demand with intermittent renewable energy source availability, decreases peak load on the electric grid, allows buildings to respond to utility price signals, supports electrical network reliability and market growth of products and processes aligned with clean economic growth. The incorporation of DR into the model residential energy codes was considered for both the 2021 and 2024 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) code development cycles. The approved DR measures in the 2021 cycle were removed in response to appeals (ICC 2020). Updated language was presented for consideration again for the 2024 IECC, where it was negotiated and again approved, and again removed in response to appeals (ICC 2024). This resulted in many sections, including sections on demand responsive controls, being moved to the credits options or an appendix as a voluntary application. This technical brief updates the proposed DR components such that they can be considered by states and local governments for direct incorporation into their codes, as well as for future IECC energy code development. The proposal refinements are intended to support consistency in approach and provide a degree of certainty for building owners, designers, contractors, manufacturers, and building and fire safety professionals. The scope of this technical brief includes three strategies for DR in residential buildings: 1) smart thermostats with demand-responsive control, 2) electric water heating incorporating demand-responsive controls and communication and 3) grid Integrated solar and energy storage systems.

2021 IECC↗
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

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 OSTI2024

Methodology for Evaluating Commercial Energy Code Updates

This document lays out the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) methodology for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of energy code and standard proposals and editions. The evaluation is applied to new provisions or editions of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and the International Energy Conservation Code. The methodology follows standard lifecycle cost (LCC) economic analysis procedures. A cost-effectiveness evaluation requires three steps: 1) evaluating the energy and energy cost savings of code changes; 2) evaluating the incremental and replacement costs related to the changes; and 3) determining the cost-effectiveness of energy code changes based on those costs and savings over time.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Electric Vehicle Charging for Residential and Commercial Energy Codes: Technical Brief

Numerous studies show that sales of electric vehicles (EVs) have grown consistently over recent years in the U.S. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimated 3 million EVs were on the road in 2022, and the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) forecasts a total of 26.4 million EVs on the road by 2030. Based on this forecast, EEI projects the need for an additional 12.9 million EV charge ports by 2030. If EV charging infrastructure fails to keep pace with sales of EVs it could result in consumers stranded without options to power their vehicles. EVs are capable of providing substantial benefits to the consumers. EVs are less expensive to operate than conventional internal combustion engine vehicles, have lower maintenance costs, and have the convenience of fueling (charging) at home or work. Studies conducted in California show that costs associated with installing EV charging infrastructure can be substantially more expensive for retrofit scenarios compared to new construction, making inclusion of EV infrastructure in new construction codes a cost-effective policy option to increase infrastructure to meet growing demands. PNNL tracks adoption of mandatory EV provisions across the U.S. As of December 20, 2024, 12 states (California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Vermont) and 53 local governments have added EV provisions to their building codes, local ordinances and zoning requirements. Originally published in 2022, this tech brief has been revised to align with recent model energy code committee discussions and published EV infrastructure code language. This technical brief summarizes market trends, costs and benefits, and provides sample code language for EV charging infrastructure for consideration to be included in model codes, such as the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, as well as directly by states and local governments in their building codes. The technical brief summarizes related efforts undertaken by states and local governments, and builds upon language considered during the 2021 and 2024 IECC development cycles.

2021 IECC↗
DOE OSTI2024

Building Performance Standards and Energy Code Alignment: Technical Brief

Building energy codes focus on building design, construction and renovation and have significantly increased building efficiency since the first national energy code was published in 1975. Most jurisdictions have energy codes based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (hereto referred to as Standard 90.1) and the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). Compliance options available in these model energy codes include a prescriptive path, whole building performance paths – including IECC Total Building Performance (TBP), Standard 90.1 Energy Cost Budget (ECB) method and Performance Rating Method (PRM) – and system performance paths for envelope and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems. Building performance standard (BPS) policies are an emerging policy tool used by jurisdictions to reduce the operational energy use or greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the existing commercial building stock. BPS policies vary widely between jurisdictions and are tailored to each location’s climate and energy goals. Intuitively, projects that met a recent edition of the energy code should comply with the BPS targets.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

Building Performance Standards and Energy Code Alignment - Technical Brief

Building energy codes focus on building design, construction and renovation and have significantly increased building efficiency since the first national energy code was published in 1975. Most jurisdictions have energy codes based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (hereto referred to as Standard 90.1) and the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). Compliance options available in these model energy codes include a prescriptive path, whole building performance paths – including IECC Total Building Performance (TBP), Standard 90.1 Energy Cost Budget (ECB) method and Performance Rating Method (PRM) – and system performance paths for envelope and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems. Building performance standard (BPS) policies are an emerging policy tool used by jurisdictions to reduce the operational energy use or greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the existing commercial building stock. BPS policies vary widely between jurisdictions and are tailored to each location’s climate and energy goals. Intuitively, projects that met a recent edition of the energy code should comply with the BPS targets. However, some new buildings may struggle with meeting the BPS for the following reasons: 1. Energy codes focus on the design of the building and its projected ability to perform efficiently, while BPS compliance is dependent on the actual ongoing performance of the building, considering variables like occupancy, operation, and maintenance. 2. There are significant differences in the methodologies used to determine BPS compliance versus code compliance, including how each handles compliance metrics, handling of building amenities, and renewable energy generation. 3. The prescriptive compliance path in the energy code is based on performance of individual building components, as opposed to the performance compliance path which accounts for holistic building design strategies and interdependent building systems. This can result in a significant variability in post-occupancy performance for buildings built using the prescriptive path. Designs on the lower end of the permitted efficiency range may struggle with meeting the BPS.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

A New State of the Art: Zero Energy Modular Multifamily Construction

In 2020, the U.S. Department of Energy's Building Technologies Office (BTO) launched the Advanced Building Construction (ABC) Initiative. This initiative aimed to integrate energy efficiency into high-production construction practices. One focus area of the initiative is off-site construction, an approach that may achieve scalable, efficient, and high-performing construction buildings through process standardization. This report presents the findings and recommendations from our ABC Initiative project: A New State of the Art: Zero-Energy Modular Multifamily Construction System. The objectives of the BTO-funded project are to: 1) Achieve energy performance 50% better than the 2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). 2) Achieve this level of energy performance at no additional cost VEIC worked with Louisiana State University (LSU), National Renewal Energy Lab (NREL), [the project team], and industry partners at the Mod Coach, KBS, and Solar Home Factory to identify and analyze multifamily business designs and modular construction practices. These designs and processes hold the promise of achieving the goals set out by the DOE.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

National Cost-Effectiveness of the Residential Provisions of the 2024 IECC

This analysis focuses on single-family and low-rise multifamily residential buildings based on the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). The IECC is developed by the International Code Council (ICC) on a 3-year cycle through a public development and consensus process. While proponents of code changes often include the energy and cost-effectiveness criteria for their respective code change, the IECC process does not include an energy or cost-effectiveness analysis of the entire edition of the code. PNNL evaluated the cost effectiveness of the changes in the prescriptive and mandatory residential provisions of the 2024 edition of the IECC, hereafter referred as the 2024 IECC, compared to those in the prior edition, the 2021 IECC. The simulated performance path and the Energy Rating Index (ERI) path (introduced in the 2015 IECC) are not considered in this analysis due to the wide variation in building construction characteristics that are allowed.

2024 IECC↗
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 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 OSTI2022

Potential energy savings benefits and limitations of radiative cooling coatings for U.S. residential buildings

We report radiative coatings are a promising strategy to implement passive cooling that provides an eco-friendly pathway to achieve energy efficiency in buildings. This study investigates the benefits and limitations of implementing radiative coatings on the building envelope, particularly the roof, of residential buildings in the United States. The analysis compares the performance of an ideal radiative coating with broadband surface properties to a realistic radiative coating with diffuse and semitransparent properties. To enhance the net energy efficiency of buildings, we carried out a comprehensive parametric analysis comprising key radiation surface properties to maximize cooling energy savings while minimizing heating energy penalties. A countrywide assessment for 68 locations across the United States showed that net energy savings are a strong function of the climatic and atmospheric conditions. Broadly, southern locations showed high overall energy savings whereas northern locations exhibited high overall energy penalties. Locations in International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) climate zones 1A, 2A, and 2B showed a net annual energy savings above 5%, whereas locations in IECC climate zones 5B, 6B, and 7 showed a net annual energy penalty greater than 3%. The hot and dry climate of Phoenix, Arizona, showed the highest overall energy savings of 426 kWh (6.2%). Additionally, the mathematical correlation reveals that the net energy savings of a location is positive only when its average cooling degree days is greater than 5.5 or its average heating degree days is less than 10.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

Experimental characterization and potential energy savings of insulated cladding for U.S. residential buildings

This study evaluates a novel insulated cladding composed of foamed cement and vinyl siding that is designed as a retrofit product to enhance thermal performance in U.S. residential buildings. Experimental measurements showed that foamed cement exhibits a thermal conductivity of 0.0334–0.0365 W/m-K (R-value of 4.0–4.3 °F⋅ft 2 ⋅h/BTU), which is significantly higher than that of conventional fiber cement boards. Although mechanical testing confirmed the material’s brittleness and low strength, it also indicated its suitability for nonstructural insulation applications. Water vapor permeability testing demonstrated effective moisture resistance with the polymer coating. To evaluate the insulated cladding’s energy performance, we used the U.S. Department of Energy’s prototype single-family building model and simulated across 50 locations spanning 16 International Energy Conservation Code climate zones. The R-7 (R-value of 7 °F⋅ft 2 ⋅h/BTU per inch) retrofit cladding resulted in heating energy savings up to 275 therms (Fairbanks, AK) and cooling energy savings up to 1,547 kWh (Phoenix, AZ). The energy cost savings varied by region, but the highest annual cost savings ($\$$434/year) were observed in Santa Maria, CA, and the highest annual cost savings percentage (37 %) were noted in Monterey, CA. On a national scale, the insulated retrofit provided an average annual energy cost reduction of 16 %, highlighting the cladding system’s broad applicability and financial viability.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2022

Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Energy Conservation Standards for Manufactured Housing

This draft environmental impact statement (EIS) analyzes the impacts related to DOE’s proposed energy conservation standards for manufactured homes. DOE’s proposed energy conservation standards are based on the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and relate to the building thermal envelope; air sealing; installation of insulation; duct sealing; heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC); service hot water systems; mechanical ventilation fan efficacy; and heating and cooling equipment sizing. The draft EIS evaluates DOE’s proposed action (energy conservation standards tiered based the manufacturers retail list price), alternatives to the proposed action (including energy conservation standards tiered based on size of the manufactured home and untiered standards), and a no action alternative. The draft EIS presents analysis of impacts related to (1) energy resources; (2) air resources (including greenhouse gases, climate change, ambient air quality and indoor air quality); (3) health and safety; (4) socioeconomics; and (5) environmental justice.

MacDonell, Margaret↗
DOE OSTI2022

Heating and Cooling Energy Modeling of 3D-Printed Concrete Construction of Residential Buildings [Slides]

3D printed concrete construction (C3DP) is an emerging technology that comes with the associated benefits of high thermal mass walls. We investigated using BEopt software the heating and cooling energy use of a single story C3DP-constructed house. We then compared the heating/cooling energy use of the C3DP house against the corresponding energy use in a traditional timber (wood) frame construction (WFC), as well as a concrete masonry unit (CMU) construction. Both peak energy use for heating and cooling (Btu), as well as base energy use for both heating and cooling (MMBtu/yr) of the C3DP design were compared against the WFC and CMU baseline construction of identical geometries and orientations across all eight climate zones defined in the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). The BEopt models for all three constructions (C3DP, WFC, and CMU) were built to comply with the 2018 IECC code. Results indicate that C3DP construction has significant heating and cooling energy benefits in certain climate zones, with the highest peak cooling energy savings (9% compared to WFC, and 5% compared to CMU) in the IECC Climate Zone 1 in the month of July. The peak heating and cooling energy demand reduction of C3DP were found to be more significant than the base heating and cooling energy demand in all IECC climate zones. The 2018 IECC compliance-related U-Factor adjustments of all models also resulted in more peak energy savings of the C3DP design in the cooling-dominated climate zones (climate zones 1 and 2), moderate energy savings in moderate climate zones (climate zones 3, 4, and 6), and little to no change in energy savings in very cold climates (climate zones 7 and 8).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

An Approach to High-Performance Affordable Housing Using Point-Source Space Conditioning

In cooperation with the Building America Program, The Levy Partnership explored a variety of options to reduce space-conditioning energy consumption, working with partners to design, manu- facture, and build test homes in three states. The Levy Partnership tested the use of minisplit ductless heat pumps in combi- nation with small through-wall transfer fans to provide space conditioning in small single-story homes, including manufactured homes and homes built by Habitat for Humanity. The team set out to achieve 50% less energy consumption, compared to the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code, while maintaining home afford- ability and thermal comfort. The strategy also included a highly efficient thermal envelope to reduce space-conditioning loads.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗