Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Hello everyone! I’m Emily Evans with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory,

  • and welcome to today’s webinar, which is hosted by the Clean Energy Solutions Center

  • in partnership with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Today’s webinar is

  • focused on the Large-scale Energy Efficiency in Indian BuildingsThe Impact and Role

  • of the Energy Conservation Building Code.

  • One important note of mention before we begin our presentations is that the Clean Energy

  • Solutions Center does not endorse or recommend specific products or services. Information

  • provided in this webinar is featured in the Solutions Center’s resource library as one

  • of many best practices resources reviewed and selected by technical experts.

  • Before we begin, I’ll quickly go over some of the webinar features. For audio, you have

  • two options. You may either listen through your computer or over your telephone. If you

  • choose to listen through your computer, please select the "mic and speakers" option in the

  • audio pane. Doing so we will eliminate the possibility of feedback and echo. If you choose

  • to dial in by phone please select the telephone option and a box on the right side will display

  • the telephone number and audio PIN you should use to dial in. Panelists, we ask that you

  • please mute your audio device while you are not presenting. If anyone is having technical

  • difficulties with the webinar, you may contact the GoToWebinars Help Desk at 888.259.3826

  • for assistance.

  • If you would like to ask a question, we ask that you use the "Questions" pane where you

  • may type in your question. If you are having difficulty viewing the materials through the

  • webinar portal, you will find PDF copies of the presentations at cleanenergysolutions.org/training

  • and you may follow along as our speakers present. Also, an audio recording and the presentations

  • will be posted to the Solutions Center training page within a few of weeks and will be added

  • to the Solutions Center YouTube channel where you will find other informative webinars,

  • as well as video interviews with thought leaders on clean energy policy topics.

  • Today’s webinar agenda is centered around the presentations from our guest panelists

  • Elena Berger, Meredydd Evans and Sha Yu, Jyotirmay Mathur and Bhaskar Deol. These panelists have

  • been kind enough to join us to review the progress with ECBC implementation in India

  • and analyze the economic impacts of ECBC-compliant buildings.

  • Before our speakers begin their presentations I will provide a short informative overview

  • of the Clean Energy Solutions Center Initiative. Then, following the presentations, we will

  • have a Question and Answer session where the panelists will address questions submitted

  • by the audience, then closing remarks and a brief evaluation.

  • This slide provides us with a bit of background in terms of how the Solutions Center came

  • to be. The Solutions Center is one of 13 initiatives of the Clean Energy Ministerial that was launched

  • in April of 2011 and is primarily led by Australia, the United States, and other CEM partners.

  • Outcomes of this unique initiative include support of developing countries and emerging

  • economies through enhancement of resources on policies relating to energy access, no-cost

  • expert policy assistance, peer to peer learning and training tools, such as the webinar you

  • are attending today.

  • The Solutions Center has four primary goals: It serves as a clearinghouse of clean energy

  • policy resources. It also serves to share policy best practices, data, and analysis

  • tools specific to clean energy policies and programs. The Solutions Center delivers dynamic

  • services that enable expert assistance, learning, and peer to peer sharing of experiences. And

  • lastly, the Center fosters dialogue on emerging policy issues and innovation around the globe.

  • Our primary audience is energy policy makers and analysts from governments and technical

  • organizations in all countries, but we also strive to engage with the private sector,

  • NGOs, and civil society.

  • A marquee feature that the Solutions Center provides is the no-cost expert policy assistance

  • known as "Ask-an-Expert." The Ask an Expert program has established a broad team of over

  • 30 experts from around the globe who are available to provide remote policy advice and analysis

  • to all countries at no cost. For example, in the area of Buildings we are very pleased

  • to have Cesar Treviño, Leader Mexico Green Building Council serving as one of our experts.

  • If you have a need for policy assistance in Buildings or any other clean energy sector,

  • we encourage you to use this valuable service. Again, this assistance is provided free of

  • charge. To find out if the Ask-an-Expert service can benefit your work please contact Sean

  • Esterly directly at sean.esterly@nrel.gov or at 303.384.7436. We also invite you to

  • spread the word about this service to those in your networks and organizations.

  • In summary, we encourage you to explore and take advantage of the Solutions Center resources

  • and services including the expert policy assistance, the database of clean energy policy resources,

  • subscribe to our newsletter, and participate in webinars like this one.

  • Now, I’d like to provide brief introductions for today’s panelists.

  • First up today is Dr. Elena Berger. Dr. Elena Berger is a Science and Technology Fellow

  • at the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, International

  • Program, currently managing the portfolio of projects in renewable and energy efficiency

  • in collaboration with India. Following Dr. Berger we will hear from Meredydd

  • Evans. Meredydd is an energy policy and finance expert with over 20 years of international

  • experience and has worked on energy efficiency and clean energy policies and projects in

  • numerous countries.

  • Presenting with Meredydd will be Sha Yu. Sha is a scientist at the Pacific Northwest National

  • Laboratory.

  • After Meredydd and Sha we will hear from Jyotirmay Mathur. Jyotirmay is a mechanical engineer,

  • with postgraduate degrees in energy from the Indian Institute of Technology, in New Delhi

  • (India) and the University of Essen (Germany)

  • Our final presenter today will be Bhaskar Deol. Bhaskar is an India representative with

  • NRDC’s India Team and is based in New Delhi.

  • And with those introductions I’d like to welcome Dr. Berger to the webinar. Dr. Berger?

  • >> ELENA BERGER: Thank you Emily for that introduction. So I'm waiting to see the presentation.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: And we're getting the slide up. Just give us one moment.

  • >> ELENA BERGER: Thank you very much and thank you for joining this webinar given by the

  • US Department of Energy and organized by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL)

  • with the participation of the Malaviya Institute of Technology (MNIT) and the Natural Resources

  • Defense Council (NRDC). I thank you, our partners, at MNIT and NRDC for cooperating with us in

  • organizing this webinar. Next slide please.

  • I would also like to acknowledge our great partners who helped us disseminate information

  • about this webinar. Next slide please.

  • This webinar in our continuing work to support the adoption of building codes in India takes

  • place within the framework of our bilateral partnership between India and the United States

  • and in the recent meeting between Prime Minister Modi and President Obama the two leaders emphasized

  • the commitment of the two countries in advancing the partnership in energy and climate change.

  • Next slide please

  • The Partnership to Advance Clean Energy or PACE has three main components: PACE-D for

  • deployment, PACE-R for research and development, and PEACE for energy access. Building codes

  • belong to the deployment arm of PACE along with other energy efficiency activities, renewable

  • energy, clean fossil, and clean energy finance efforts. Next slide please

  • The Partnership to Advance Clean Energy or PACE takes place under the umbrella of the

  • Indo-US Energy Dialogue and its six working groups. The cooperation on renewable energy

  • and energy efficiency technology are managed under two working groups - Power & Energy

  • Efficiency and New Technology & Renewable Energy working groups. Next slide please

  • The Indo-US Collaboration for the adoption of ECBC is managed under the Power and Energy

  • Efficiency working group. Under this collaboration DOE and PNNL have been engaged with the government

  • of Rajasthan and MNIT since 2011 in two main efforts - Training and Institutional Support

  • and Incentives. We believe that these efforts are very important to advance the main barriers

  • that have presented the adoption of building codes in India.

  • On training, PNNL and MNIT have developed and delivered training workshops and stakeholder

  • meetings in Rajasthan and have developed set of training materials on ECBC 101. On institutional

  • support, PNNL and MNIT have developed an ECBC roadmap in collaboration with the government

  • of Rajasthan, and we have created an award to accelerate the adoption of the code by

  • stakeholders in the state. You will learn more from my colleagues from PNNL that do

  • provide in great detail and talk about these activities in Rajasthan.

  • More recently PNNL has collaborated with MNIT on two ECBC compliant pilot buildings at the

  • MNIT campus and details about this pilot will be presented by Dr. Jyotirmay Mathur from

  • MNIT during this webinar. Mr. Deol Bhaskar from NRDC will also provide case studies from

  • successes in the state of Andhra Pradesh and I thank you NRDC for being a great partner

  • all along in collaborating with us to disseminate the benefits of ECBC doing this webinar. I

  • hope you really enjoy the information that we are trying to convey during this session

  • and will be happy to answer questions at the end of this webinar. Thank you for your attention.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you Elena. I will now hand it off to Meredydd Evans and Sha Yu who

  • will talk to us about the ECBC implementation, progress, lessons learned and options. Meredydd

  • and Sha?

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: Hi, thank you. While the slides are loading...great, I see them right

  • there. I'd like to first say thank you for joining us and I'm looking forward to sharing

  • a few thoughts with you. Next slide please

  • So, on ECBC implementation today I'll describe a couple of themes. First off is an introduction

  • - why ECBC is important and what it is. I'll also talk about progress with implementation

  • and some lessons learned in Rajasthan. Sha Yu will then describe tools for implementation

  • and some takeaway points. Next slide

  • This slide you can see two figures that highlight the core reason for focusing on new buildings

  • in India. They show projections that our institute has done using integrative assessment modeling.

  • They present data on the likely growth in floor space in billion square meters, both

  • in commercial and residential space, from now through 2095 as well as the linked increase

  • in energy demand those buildings in a scenario where there are no specific building policies,

  • like building energy codes. You can see there is a likely tremendous growth in the amount

  • of floor space so by 2050 we are talking something like 35 billion square meters of new buildings.

  • Energy use in those buildings would increase substantially as well. That could put tremendous

  • pressure on India's power system as well as its overall energy systems and instead there

  • is an alternative to save energy and to reduce the energy impact of those buildings while

  • still maintaining comfort. Next slide please

  • So here you can see some analysis the business case for the ECBC. We show calculated savings

  • for ECBC compliant buildings versus typical buildings in different cities in India. The

  • savings are really impressive - 25-40% of the energy can be saved, depending on exactly

  • where the building is and whether it is a building that is used 24 hours a day or is

  • used during day time. Regardless, very impressive figures and what's more those savings are

  • cost effective. Next slide Which means that the savings themselves, the

  • reduction in energy consumption, can pay for itself, can pay for the investments themselves.

  • In addition, ECBC implementation can reduce CO2 emissions and it can accelerate deployment

  • of energy-efficient technologies. Next slide

  • So, what is ECBC? Just a quick overview. It was issued in 2007 by the Ministry of Power

  • and the Bureau of Energy Efficiency. It's mandatory in the states that have adopted

  • it for all new commercial buildings with connected load over 100kW, basically for all large new

  • commercial buildings. It's different from voluntary labels like LEED because it is mandatory

  • and it applies to all buildings in those jurisdictions. ECBC addresses building envelope - so the

  • walls, windows, etc., HVAC, lighting, electrical systems, hot water, and pumping. And it allows

  • for three different compliance approaches: A prescriptive approach with specific levels

  • of say insulation or specific types of windows allowed, a trade-off option with slightly

  • more flexibility, and a whole building performance approach that requires the use of sophisticated

  • building simulation software. So just to recap a couple of the differences between ECBC and

  • green building labels such as LEED or GRIHA, ECBC is mandatory and it covers presumably

  • all buildings in the jurisdictions that adopt it. ECBC covers only the energy provisions,

  • so not other energy issues, other non-energy issues like water. ECBC is not score based

  • but rather it's based on engineering principles. Next slide

  • Here is a little bit of information on the implications of ECBC for different stakeholder

  • groups. I know that the next speakers will talk a little bit more about this so I will

  • go over it quickly. For example, local governments or ULBs will need to add code requirements

  • if they have not already done so in order to make ECBC effective. They also need to

  • be involved in ECBC enforcement, for example, involving their party inspectors as one option.

  • Manufacturers will likely see an extended market for energy efficiency products and

  • materials. Real estate and construction companies will need to ensure code compliance during

  • building construction for new buildings. Developers, like architects or engineers, need to make

  • sure they integrate the code into their building design and that they document compliance for

  • code authorities. Next slide

  • So, today ECBC has been adopted by a range of states in India. You can see the Bureau

  • of Energy Efficiency lists the states and their status in terms of whether they have

  • issued formal notification to make it mandatory or they're in some other stage of the process.

  • The number of states is growing all the time and it is at that level that ECBC then becomes

  • mandatory. Next slide

  • Focusing on Rajasthan, a few of the milestones there with the ECBC implementation: In March

  • 2011, the Rajasthan government adopted ECBC with minor additions. In September 2011, then

  • ECBC entered into force. Compliance became mandatory. Then in June 2012 another important

  • step was that ECBC incorporated into the local bylaws, which made it formally a part of the

  • process for approving buildings. Since 2011, DOE and PNNL have worked with the government

  • of Rajasthan and MNIT to support roll out of ECBC and build capacity among stakeholders.

  • Next slide

  • Finally, on my side, a couple of lessons in terms of the barriers of implementation. In

  • a nutshell, it's capacity. In particular, state and local governments lack, in many

  • cases, the capacity and resources to implement and enforce the code. ULBs, would typically

  • be the primary enforcement entities, lack technical expertise and staff to implement

  • ECBC effectively in many jurisdictions. So that is an important barrier. Sha will talk

  • about some alternatives that can help boost this capacity. In addition, building professionals,

  • while their experience with ECBC is growing rapidly, many still lack capacity and/or access

  • to energy simulation programs that are required for the whole building compliance test. So

  • that is one reason we are really excited to hold this webinar and share a little bit of

  • information, raise interest in ECBC. On a slightly different topic there is somewhat

  • limited capacity for testing building materials and equipment, which is essential to make

  • sure that those materials actually match what is required under the code. Overall, stakeholders

  • cited the lack of code training as the most important barrier for ECBC implementation.

  • Fortunately that is something that we can actually address together. With that I'd like

  • to turn it over to Sha.

  • >> SHA YU: Thank you Meredydd. Next slide please.

  • As Meredydd mentioned earlier, there are several barriers for ECBC implementation and fortunately

  • there are approaches and tools that can help tackle these barriers and [inaudible 22:57]

  • the ECBC implementation. One important aspect is to raise capacity of relevant stakeholders

  • through training, trainer-to-trainer programs, and potential use of certified third parties

  • in the states. ULBs, in particular, is critical for adopting and enforcing ECBC and monitoring

  • the progress. So, raising awareness of ULBs and building their capacity will help roll

  • out implementation and increase compliance. At the same time, testing and rating of energy

  • efficient materials is important and is actually an important building block for all building

  • energy policies, including ECBC. So, the best testing and rating system will help and guarantee

  • that building contractors meet all of the design specifications. Finally, there are

  • several software tools that could make compliance easier for designers, for ULBs, for consultants

  • and I will further discuss the software in the later slides. Next one please

  • There are three major tools or approaches that I'm going to discuss today and that would

  • be the potential use of third-party assessors in ECBC implementation and some training and

  • capacity activities that have been done and in the end the compliance software in India

  • or other countries. Next one please

  • As discussed earlier, limited capacity and human resources of ULBs is one of the major

  • barriers for ECBC implementation. The potential use of third-party assessors could help alleviate

  • burdens on local and state governments and help improve capacity irrevocably. For developers,

  • this approach could potentially reduce permitting application times and make it faster. It also

  • provides a signal to view the market in earnest in general. These third-parties have been

  • done in several other countries, including US, China, and some European countries, in

  • code implementation and it's proven effective in building capacity and maintaining code

  • implementation. For example in China by using third parties they have been successfully

  • increased compliance rates from around 50% in 2005 to close to 100% today in major cities.

  • So it is a huge improvement in the past 8 years, and the use of third-parties, largely

  • contribute to this progress. Third-party factors could be architects, engineers, and other

  • consultants that have past experience in building energy efficiency and certified. Currently

  • the Bureau of Energy Efficiency is developing a national certification system for third-parties

  • through a National Productivity Council. So people that have experience in building energy

  • efficiency might be qualified as third-party assessors after taking exams and certified

  • by the Bureau of Energy Efficiency and National Productivity Council. I think in Rajasthan

  • we are discussing the potential of using third-parties and in Andhra Pradesh, as I will discuss later,

  • they are also looking at the third-party approaches. Designers, developers and ULBs potentially

  • could work with third-party inspectors during the design and construction stages and this

  • might have some potential growth of third-parties during both plan review and construction and

  • inspection stages including, for example, in plan review you need to check building

  • plans, review materials, and specification, as well as calculations. Next one please

  • As discussed earlier, there are several benefits of using third-parties such as building capacity,

  • increasing market opportunities, and foster permitting process. However, it may also slightly

  • increase the cost of developers by paying third-parties. The third-party system also

  • requires multiple checks and balances to guarantee a fair process. Several factors that need

  • to be considered when designing a third-party system this would include: a robust third-party

  • training and certification program, which the Bureau of Energy Efficiency is doing right

  • now; and random checks of approved projects; and also there might be penalties involved

  • if there is a violation. Next one please

  • So, while ECBC has mandatory energy requirements for all building components and it affects

  • plan review, design, construction, as well as equipment installation. So to raise awareness

  • of stakeholders, PNNL has been collaborating with MNIT to develop training materials and

  • conduct ECBC training for different stakeholder groups in Rajasthan. The training materials

  • we developed complement the existing training materials developed by US AID and BEE group

  • and covers both general introduction information about ECBC and specifications for different

  • building components. It has been found in the US and elsewhere that training is multifactive

  • when targeting specific stakeholder groups. So in light we have conducted separate training

  • for architects, for ULBs, and for engineers in Rajasthan. We will share a link of all

  • the training materials we have developed with this presentation later. Next one please

  • Here is an example slide we took from the Code 101 training that MNIT and PNNL developed.

  • Code 101 training in general includes the general knowledge of building energy efficiency,

  • specific information about ECBC, and relevant compliance rate with a comprehensive approach,

  • like prescriptive, trade off, and whole building performance. In particular, Code 101 talks

  • about how ECBC is relevant to you as an architect, engineer, government official, or developer.

  • We also include a few case studies showing energy things and economic benefits of ECBC

  • compliant buildings. Later we'll show a concrete example of how the building will perform if

  • it's an ECBC compliant building based on our pilot on the Pacific Northwest campus.

  • In general as Meredydd talked earlier, ECBC sets minimum requirements for building systems.

  • For example, much of building energy use comes in the form of cooling and ventilation in

  • India so ECBC set minimum criteria for the HVAC system and equipment taking into consideration

  • the energy amounts of the building space. Architects, builders, and developers together

  • all need to collaboratively implement ECBC during the building design and construction

  • process. That will be including meeting all the code requirements including ECBC requirements

  • within the budget constraints. Also, that would affect the material selection and installation.

  • For example, by doing or installing proper insulation of materials and correct efficiency

  • replacings. The next one please.

  • There are several useful tools that could facilitate the compliance checks and code

  • implementation. Here in this slide we give some examples of compliance software. For

  • example, ECOnirman Prescriptive, developed by USAID and BEE, based on a contract to use

  • in the US. It is a web-based to provide compliance check software for both prescriptive and trade

  • off approaches. The software could help compute compliance results for building components

  • and will help generate reports that could be reviewed by ULBs and code officials later.

  • Next one please

  • So as a conclusion slide, we learn from the experience in Rajasthan that there are benefits of implementing

  • ECBC. As Meredydd talked earlier, in general it can save you 25-40% off energy and it is

  • cost effective. Building code is mandatory once it is adopted. It is definitely requirement

  • energy for building systems. Learning from Rajasthan, there are some common problems

  • in code implementation such as lack of capacity and lack of building materials [inaudible

  • 32:14] systems but there are potential tools that could help address this problem, including

  • the use of third-parties. Some useful tools are software and the continuing of training

  • programs in multiple places for different stakeholder groups.

  • Going forward there are priorities we feel important in administering ECBC implementation.

  • Important stakeholders like ULBs are critical to building capacity and through training

  • and awareness raising programs and because they are critical in terms of adopting ECBC

  • and checking the progress and also for the design professionals it is also important

  • to increase their capacity through training and other activities. They are part of the

  • design process but they could also serve potentially as third-parties. The last one. Next one please.

  • In the end of the presentation we actually pulled together a few of the resources you

  • can further refer to after the presentation and thank you for listening today and now

  • I will turn over to Emily.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you Sha and Meredydd for that excellent presentation. Now I'd like

  • to hand it over to Jyotirmay who will talk about the ECBC impacts and the experiences

  • from the ECBC pilot building in India. Jyotirmay?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Thank you very much and thank you all the participants who are there

  • online with us for joining and seeing how we try to implement ECBC and the pilot building

  • at MNIT. I'm also thankful to my co-presenter, Tarush Chandra, who is a colleague of mine

  • and he was also the architect of this building. He will also be available to answer any questions

  • related to the architecture of this building.

  • So the overview of my presentation is first of all I would like to describe the project,

  • then a little bit about the climatic conditions on the site for those that are not in Jaipur

  • or around, the benefits of code compliance buildings, how we proceed and how we convinced

  • our administrators and finance persons to take decisions, specifications of components

  • and systems, simulation results, and summary of our experiences. Next slide

  • So this building was already existing as a single floor, partially air conditioned building

  • of about 4,000 square meters. Then we decided to have one floor on the top of it. Once the

  • work started another receipt was taken, which was quite important. One more floor was to

  • be added and then third addition was to make a major retrofitting on the ground floor itself,

  • which was partially conditioned initially.

  • So the present status is that currently the first floor and the second floor, they are

  • ready. The first floor is already operational in one half of it. The second floor is undergoing

  • some furniture fitting. It will also be functional very soon. Ground floor is at the finishing

  • stage so we very soon will have this building functional. A simulation of this building

  • is performed on the basis of design and specifications of the installed systems. The simulation will

  • be revised after the ground floor is also finished because of some decision, if it is

  • taken, till the time of completion of the ground floor that would require us to move

  • [inaudible 36:06]. So the results, which I present today, might be slightly different

  • than finally after results will be after final completion of the total building.

  • So the building is basically used, or going to be used, for an office purpose and a computer

  • center. So the building operates 8 AM to 8 PM as an office but the computer laboratories

  • they work around the clock and also on the weekends partially. All the number of floors

  • is G+2. The total carpeted area now on the three floors is 11,306 square meters and most

  • of it is conditioned now. The window to wall ratio of this building is about 27%.

  • If you Google Design Center MNIT you will find an image, which is there on the left

  • hand side and on the right hand side I have a circle, which is showing the design center

  • building. On the further right of this building is the next project, which we are working

  • on, and this is the lecture theater complex. We call it Vivekanand Lecture Theater Complex.

  • We can review the results of this theater later.

  • The climate conditions of Jaipur, which falls in composite climatic zone. As for the climatic

  • classification of India, it has a latitude of 26.5, longitude 75.5, we have elevation

  • 390 meters, cooling degree days are relatively high - 5,732, and heating degree days at 141.

  • So as on the right hand side we have shown that the monthly mean temperature is reading

  • from maximum of 35 to minimum of about 15. The humidity is also reading quite a lot.

  • The minimum is about 18%, which is very dry in April to a maximum of a quite high value.

  • This is the rainy season.

  • On this graph I tried to show the relative humidity in a pictorial way and, in a sense,

  • this humidity and dry bulb temperature as well. The dry bulb temperature, these dark

  • red points, represent very hot time in a year. That is from April to the mid of July. We

  • have very cold, as per Indian definition; we call about 2 degrees, 3 degrees, 4, degrees

  • as very cold temperature. They are in the month of December as on the chart. Dry weather

  • is in the month of April and humid weather is in the month of July.

  • For the features of Design Center Building, we have going to the east side of the building,

  • which is the main entrance, we have an entrance, which is projected and self-shading, and I

  • will show a picture of how the building is of self-shading time. We have on the south

  • side of staircase and a corridor and a facility area, which is the toilet block. The reason

  • for doing this was to reduce the heat from the south side. On the west side we have this

  • projected area as a ramp and this ramp is designed with a feature that when we have

  • evening low altitude sun this ramp actually shades the left side of my west facade. Similarly

  • if it is on the left hand side that is toward the south it shades the right hand side of

  • the facade. This ramp is actually helping us in shading the facade. There are fence,

  • and we are also using fence on the sides, including north side, because again for the

  • low altitude sun these fence are useful for the solar ingress to the windows.

  • We have a courtyard that was already existing in this building. We have retained this courtyard

  • as its feature. These are the four photographs. On the east side, as you are seeing, this

  • is the front elevation of the building. This is going to the main entrance of this building.

  • We have the north side and the fence. You can see the fence on this photograph. We have

  • the south side. We have the pilot block. We have the corridors. We have the staircase.

  • This is the ramp area, which is shaded, so you can see that this part of the building,

  • the left part of the building, is shaded by this ramp.

  • Some more pictures - this is the finished part of the front entrance and the glass is

  • completely shaded as you can see. Even the shading is coming to the lower part of the

  • down floor. On the right inside picture you can also see that shading - the facade is

  • shaded and some of the windows are completely shaded because of the self-shading nature

  • of the building.

  • Motivation for us to go for code compliance was first of all the notification issued to

  • us by the government of Rajasthan, which mandated implementation of ECBC. Then, major motivation

  • was not the code actually. It was less operating cost of the building and less connected load,

  • which also reduces our demand charges. We have reduced capacity of transformer now in

  • this building as compared to a conventional way. We have reduced our capacity of electrical

  • panel and circuit breakers in this building and acceptable payback and internal rate of

  • return of energy conservation measures were also motivation to go beyond ECBC. So in this

  • building we have not stopped. We started to look at ECBC level but then we thought that

  • the paybacks were quite attractive and there is a margin we could go beyond ECBC and that

  • is what we have done. Additional purpose for going for this building was also to learn

  • by doing it, to build capacity, and showcase energy conservation measures.

  • The first thing we did was to be supplied the applicability check through various definitions

  • under the scope of ECBC. So if it is a non-residential building of more than 100 kW and there is

  • an addition of two floors in this building, the ground floor is also undergoing major

  • retrofitting, and therefore it is coming under the coverage.

  • After we were done with the compliance check, we decided to go for whole building simulation

  • and not prescriptive route. There were three reasons finally - flexibility in selection

  • of elements and systems. We had a non-standard design of shading fin. We had to curve the

  • design of fin for integrating the ground floor with the extended second floor. So the first

  • floor was integrating the ground floor with the second floor through a curved fin. There

  • was no way in a prescriptive approach we could have the compliance with this fin. Ground

  • floor wall insulation, because it was already existing, was difficult to implement the insulation

  • on the ground floor. That is also another reason we did not go for the prescriptive

  • route.

  • The features of envelope are we have used XPS insulation on the roof and tiles on the

  • terrace. We have 1.5" sandwiched insulation in the wall. We have double glazed unit with

  • low E-coating on surface number 2 with UPVC frame. We have vertical fins and also overhangs.

  • The HVAC system is VRF type. We have used heat pumps also in areas with high occupancy.

  • Duct insulation is with PU foam. We have dimmable LED lights with daylight integration and in

  • addition we have 150 kW peak of solar implants. This is not a requirement of ECBC but still

  • we have done it. I will cover it slightly later.

  • If you compare with the prescriptive requirements of ECBC, which are also - to be fair - in

  • the standards rates of modeling, the wall insulation requirement was wall U-value of

  • .440. Whereas, we have stopped at .72 because we have other payback limitations. Going for

  • a higher insulation was requiring an unacceptable payback period and there we opted out. On

  • the roof, on the other hand, what we have done was the code was .409 but we have gone

  • for .35. The reasons are as listed below. We have under deck insulation on this roof

  • because our construction people and construction agency was not very confident about providing

  • us waterproofing guarantee. We agreed .409 insulation and therefore to compensate for

  • the lesser effectiveness of under deck insulation we have provided excess insulation through

  • inverted earth pots on the top side. We have also taken the decision about insulation on

  • wall and roof not only based upon the payback but also we have included the cost of avoided

  • tonnage. A lot of rounds of simulation were done and the U-value of roof, as I said, is

  • finally lower than the U-value of the code. Glazing selection was also done through the

  • help of simulation. So the U-value of 3.3 at required by the code, we have 2.2 as U-value.

  • SHGC is a little higher and there was a very specific reason of doing this. As I've listed

  • in the slide again, what happens is SHGC and VLT, they are linked with each other. If we

  • use the SHGC below a certain level the daylight ingress to the building also reduces. What

  • we have done is try to see effectiveness of different glazings and we stopped at .28 level

  • because this was offering us a glazing of .39 visible light transference and we were

  • getting an optimal combination of the daylight usage and keeping the building cool through

  • this combination. Also, there was another reason that we added shading to fins and overhangs.

  • If we apply shading adjustment factor to the U-value of .28 I would anyways be having a

  • value of less than .25. We did a total calculation because we did not have a conversion factor

  • for the curved fin. So we took the average length of fin and then we did the rough calculations

  • and we were convinced that this building was going to be code compliant. It may be lower

  • than the prescriptive value but the sim was based upon simulations.

  • A special care, which I will finally recommended through this webinar is that when you decide

  • about window glass, that time only we should go for the decision about lighting type. That

  • is what we did about this building because we were investing a lot of with glazing. If

  • we do not use available light in our interiors, the investment in glazing would go waste.

  • That is what we took care of in this building, that we took both the decisions together.

  • We also took another decision that 30% of the window area was kept openable so that

  • the building can also operate in mixed mode, although we have not modeled this in mixed

  • mode because presently we are operating it as fully conditioned and non-open window conditioning.

  • The light condition the ECBC requires is 10.8 watt per square meter LPD, whereas we have

  • gone with efficient LEDs - an LPD of 5.38 dimmable with daylight integration. We have

  • a combination of square 2x2 lights with 6" round down-lighters in the building. As you

  • can see on the right on slide there, there are two pictures. These are the square lights

  • and these other down-lighters, which are in the corridor. With the help of simulation

  • we have decided on these low LED. We measured the levels and they are sufficient and acceptable

  • as per ECBC requirements.

  • We have VRF systems and they are multiple units. There are 54 numbers of units installed

  • variable refrigerant machines where the standard says that the chiller would be a screw type,

  • with a COP of 3.05. This table has been given because we have modeled the standard HVAC

  • system according to this table, whereas the design case has been modeled after VRF.

  • There were certain reasons for going for VRF. Limited availability of water was forcing

  • us to use air cooled systems. The building is likely to have a large diversity due to

  • vacation of students, exam periods, seminars and training programs. Some of the sections

  • would be totally closed. The third reason was that discernable, exact uses of the building,

  • as I explained in the beginning of this presentation, that it was taken in steps. This was forcing

  • us, all of these three reasons together. It was forcing us to use VRF systems.

  • An additional feature that is not ECBC but we've gone for it is 150 watt kW peak of solar

  • plant on this. So there are three units of 50 kW each crystalline units. We have 6 of

  • the number of models, 50kVA*3/inverter, and in a string there are 15 modules and there

  • are 14 strings. What we have also taken care of is that, because on Saturdays and Sundays

  • most of the offices in this building would be closed, and some for the slab would be

  • utilized and therefore power exported to load the local grid. All this is there in the system.

  • The simulation results are showing energy savings, significant energy savings, in two

  • areas mainly. One is the lighting because we have roughly half the LPD. As you can see

  • these yellow bars in the standard case are double the height of, nearly double the height

  • of, yellow bars in the design case. The air conditioning load, the air conditioning cooling

  • load, is also quite low. It is high in my standard case and these blue bars are low

  • in the design case.

  • So if I compare the month by month energy consumption, this line is basically my energy

  • line as per the standard case. This line is as per my design case.

  • I come to the summary of the numbers. So if I pay the total energy consumption it is 2,192.40

  • MWh on annual basis. The purposed case is 1,704.80. All in all we are saving 487 MWh

  • on an annual basis, which in terms of EPI 194 KWh per square meter per annum was the

  • standard case, 151 in the purposed case, saving about 22% of saving beyond ECBC level. If

  • we talk about the demand reduction we could reduce the demand level by about 15%. The

  • photovoltaic system was able to give us about 16% reduction in energy savings.

  • This is the monthly generation of electricity from solar photovoltaic plants. As you can

  • see, the generation is considerably less than 15% only.

  • Coming to the lessons that we have learned and the summary, whole building performance

  • method was basically providing us flexibility in decision making based upon the techno-economic.

  • As I said, one insulation we had reduced and we had stopped even at the lower insulation,

  • this is required as per ECBC, but as we have gone in some of the things - like glazing,

  • lighting, and HVAC - beyond the ECBC requirements. Maximum energy savings in our case came to

  • three areas - glazing, efficient lighting, and HVAC system. Decisions are to be taken

  • in an integrated manner is what we have learned through this project. Standalone incidence

  • may give us a wrong picture in terms of payback period or in terms of internal rate of financial

  • investment and because they influence each other's performance greatly. There exists

  • a significant potential of exceeding the level of energy building code. Another lesson we

  • have learned and, this might be useful for the next version of ECBC, that is there is

  • an absolute necessity of human [inaudible 52:05] of ECBC and we are setting off another

  • 22% annual energy savings potential. Solar Photovoltaic integration was giving us yet

  • another 15% energy saving. All in all we are crossing 50%, more than 50%, energy savings

  • level through this building. Before I end I would like to acknowledge the

  • contributions of Dr. Vishal Garg in improvising the slides of this presentation, Shivraj Dhaka,

  • and Ashok Dhayal who have helped me a lot in collecting the specifications of this building

  • and simulating this building.

  • Thank you very much for your time. Over to you Emily.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you Jyotirmay for that excellent presentation. For our final presentation

  • I will now hand it over to Bhaskar Deol. Bhaskar, if you'd like to take it from here?

  • >> BHASKAR DEOL: Sure, hi. I'm just waiting for the presentation to come over. Great,

  • good evening everyone. Thank you so much for joining us this afternoon. Before I start

  • let me also echo Jyotirmay and the presenters that have gone ahead before me in thanking

  • DOE as well as PNNL in organizing this webinar. I think we have already had a very good set

  • of presentations discussing various aspects of the energy conservation building code.

  • What I thought I would do today is specifically focusing on the experiences we've had implementing

  • the Energy Conservation Building Code in the state of Andhra Pradesh and then leave my

  • presentation, sort of finish it off, talking a little about some other work that we have

  • been doing in the area of energy efficiency, specifically highlighting the financial payback.

  • The excellent analysis that Dr. Mathur just discussed already makes a very strong case

  • for energy efficiency in buildings in general and also ECBC. As we will see towards the

  • end of my presentation, this is also something that our analysis has shown, specifically

  • when you look at a payback period from the perspective of a building owner or real estate

  • developer.

  • Just quickly looking at the agenda for my presentation. I will start off with a quick

  • introduction to our organization, the Natural Resource Defense Council. I'll focus the bulk

  • of my presentation on the Energy Conservation Building Code implementation in Andhra and

  • Telangana states. We've already had very good discussions about the benefits of energy efficiency,

  • what are some of the key barriers in terms of we heard from Sha, for instance, about

  • capacity building for ULBs is an issue. Also, the third-party assessors being a model and

  • also Meredydd also talked specifically about how the building sector is growing. So I would

  • complement that talking a little bit about how the process of adopting ECBC to a particular

  • state looks like and how has Andhra Pradesh gone about doing that.

  • Just a quick introduction - NRDC has been working with the Administrative Staff College

  • of India. ASCI is a pioneer management and research organization established in Hyderabad

  • in 1956 and is currently working with the Bureau of Energy Efficiency as well as the

  • state designated agency in Andhra Pradesh on capacity building for local government

  • real estate developers and architects about ECBC. At NRDC we have a clean energy and climate

  • change initiative and building energy efficiency is one of the main areas where we have been

  • working along with our partners.

  • Let me just take a second to reiterate what Meredydd already talked about in a good amount

  • of detail. India has been seeing rapid growth in the real estate sector over the past several

  • years. We all know that this put significant drain on the electricity grid and what that

  • means is energy efficiency in buildings is really a low hanging fruit. That is the case

  • that we are trying to build here. Of course, looking at the key trends that we have been

  • seeing in the real estate sector wind buildings are slowly gaining in popularity. The Energy

  • Conservation Building Code is doing its part and a number of states have announced or are

  • at various stages of implementing it. Then the flip side of it is that in general if

  • you look at the typical building you do see that there is a trend of increasing energy

  • intensity. That means that the efforts that our organizations are putting in are very

  • much required. There is a strong need to make the case for investors or real estate developers

  • or home owners who are investing in buildings or building houses to focus on what are the

  • cost savings that can be achieved through efficiency. Then probably appeal to their

  • desire to have a greater market share if they are real estate developers.

  • With that let me just jump into the current status of the Energy Conservation Building

  • Code of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana States. This work really started back in 2009 and

  • 11 and I would really look at those couple of years as laying the ground work for the

  • state adopting, getting familiarized with the Energy Conservation Building Code and

  • then starting its process of implementing it or adapting it to the local requirements.

  • Then between 2012 and 13 was a series of intensive stakeholder discussions but with the government

  • making a formal announcement that it would start the process of implementing the Energy

  • Conservation Building Code. I would say key aspects of that period - first of all having

  • a steering committee, which was constituted of stakeholders that came from the necessary

  • different groups that included real estate developers, architects, as well as local government,

  • as well as civil society. And in coming together, to see how ECBC can be helpful for Andhra

  • and specifically how can that be translated into the local bylaws. We did also have state

  • bifurcation into Andhra Pradesh and Telangana states, which happened in February or earlier

  • this year. The advantage of having this process underway already was that as the state had

  • already announced it would be enacting ECBC both states have now inherited the code. So

  • that's definitely good news.

  • If we look at where we are today, that is the green arrow at the moment, the stage where

  • Andhra Pradesh and also Telangana are at right now is to empanel the architects. Sha touched

  • upon capacity building for ULBs so this is really the stage where ASCI has been working

  • with support from the UNDP [inaudible 1:00:28] program to train a number of district officials

  • and state urban local bodies as well as real estate developers and architects. The target

  • is the reach 400 stakeholders that would be trained. About half way the trainings have

  • been completed with mainly the government folks having been trained. Over the next couple

  • months more trainings will be held for real estate developers and other architects. The

  • final dates announced for the code being operationalized are August 2014 for Telangana and early next

  • year, in February 2015, for Andhra.

  • The next slide is basically to show a little bit of the key roles of various agencies that

  • come together at the national level, the state level, and the local level in adopting ECBC

  • specific to a particular state. I won't dwell on this too much but the key methods that

  • I want to leave the webinar participants with is that it truly is an integrated effort and

  • one of the most important aspects of it is really how the ECBC is translated to the local

  • level and how it is kind of tweaked as in where necessary to the needs and requirements

  • of the local agencies, as well as the real estate developers who interact with these

  • agencies on a regular basis.

  • We also had a good discussion about what ECBC constitutes so I will just focus on how the

  • interpretation of ECBC different than the code announced by the BEE. So first of all,

  • and this is not really a difference, is that it is applicable to commercial buildings,

  • offices, hospitals, and IT parks but unlike the ECBC, which has a connected load as the

  • threshold which figures a building to configure to ECBC, under the base of laying down this

  • in the square footage of the building rather than the connected load. The main reason for

  • this was because for the municipal administration department is accustomed with dealing with

  • building designs. They thought that it would be a lot more comfortable for them to look

  • at the total area rather than the connected load as something that triggers whether or

  • not ECBC should be applicable. Of course, the state code takes into account that there

  • are some building categories, which may not meet this threshold in surface area but would

  • still be an energy intensive building. So for those there is a special mention in the

  • code of the government order, which talks about multiplexes, hospitals and hotels needing

  • to comply with ECBC, irrespective with how large they are. As we already discussed under

  • our third party certification and validation system and then there is an assessment that

  • is carried out at two stages. Sha talked about this in her presentation. So, it also specifically

  • looks at first how to find the design and then having a construction approval, which

  • then required for the occupancy certificate. I'll talk about that in a minute. The other

  • key difference is also of the AP ECBC operates a star rating system based on the energy savings.

  • We have discussed earlier during this webinar the three different mechanisms with which

  • ECBC can be complied with so developers who choose to go with the whole building approach

  • can demonstrate that if their buildings go beyond the minimum requirements they get additional

  • stars for energy savings. Also, if the building goes beyond one star then there is the added

  • benefit to the developer of fast track approval for their building permissions.

  • This is what the current building approval process looks like. It is pretty much the

  • two stage process that I mentioned earlier. First there is a local body issuing construction

  • approval based on a third party assessment of the building design. Once the building

  • developer has the construction approval, they go ahead and start the construction. Upon

  • finishing the construction, they again seek certification by the third-party about the

  • building being constructed by the design specifications. With that the urban local body issues to the

  • owner an occupancy certificate and afterwards the building can be occupied. Both the third-party

  • assessors as well as the urban local bodies are being monitored and pretty much the entire

  • process is overseen by the state designated agency that's the Bureau of Energy Efficiency

  • based in Telangana and Andhra states as well as the municipal administration departments.

  • With that, what are some of the key capacity building activities that are envisioned or

  • currently being carried out to states? First of all, and this cannot be emphasized enough,

  • capacity building for planning officials and also elected representatives. There is a series

  • of programs that I mentioned earlier but also the kind of resources that PNNL has developed

  • along with Professor Jyotirmay Mathur at MNIT. They are extremely valuable in spreading information

  • and building awareness and capacity about how local bodies can comply with ECBC. The

  • empanelment of consultants is an activity, as I mentioned, is currently underway. What

  • this process entails is having workshops. First of all, the selection of empaneled design

  • consultants who are architects and can review and provide certification for buildings being

  • made to specification and then also carrying out workshops and training sessions across

  • major cities spread across the two states. Some of the cities where these trainings have

  • been carried out by asking for support from UNDP [inaudible 1:07:48]. Similarly, other

  • activities, like train the trainers, which were mentioned and Professor Sha and Professor

  • Mather have been instrumental and also awareness building activities and a couple of pilot

  • projects. Two that I would flag here is the BEE demonstration project where the Bureau

  • of Energy Efficiency has extended technical guidance for design of dormant buildings so

  • that they are ECBC compliant and also pilot project so that they extend support to the

  • municipal corporation to effectively implement Energy Conservation Building Code.

  • So here is what the national map looks like of key states currently working or at various

  • advanced stages of the Energy Conservation Building Code. I do apologize for not having

  • the interstate boundaries between the Telangana and Andhra.

  • With that the key take aways and learning from implementing ECBC in Andhra Pradesh,

  • I would say first of all, in order to create political will it is extremely important to

  • have senior government buy in for energy efficiency. In the case of Andhra Pradesh the critical

  • power shortage situation helped create that and then helped generate the momentum so that

  • there was a lot of alignment within the state of bureaucracy as well as the leaderships.

  • Energy was really low hanging fruit and could provide significant benefits without any major

  • upfront costs. The process that Andhra took, which included formation of a steering committee

  • and also some technical committees brought together key stakeholders, so that included

  • real estate developers, government officials, architects. Then in that it really ensured

  • that the key issues of implementation could be addressed early on and that certainly was

  • instrumental in helping Andhra achieve the speed that which the code was implemented.

  • Taking into account the local body functioning and I think the example of this is really

  • how the Municipal Administration Department felt that using a threshold, which was based

  • on size of building rather than the connected load was useful. Also, the importance of flexibility

  • both on the part of the municipal departments as well as the government to provide soft

  • benefits like fast track approvals for projects that were ECBC compliant.

  • With that I will take a minute to talk a little bit about some of the work that NRDC is doing

  • along with our partners to showcase the business case for energy efficiency. The way we've

  • been doing it is really through a series of case studies, reports, factsheets and resources,

  • which showcase different aspects of energy efficiency. I'll just talk about a number

  • of buildings that currently exist and have shown demonstrated results and demonstrated

  • energy savings. The ones highlighted in green have been converted into case studies. I'll

  • share links to these at the end of my presentation. Clearly as we can see, for each particular

  • building use building type energy efficiency does provide an attractive investment return

  • and a quick payback in addition to improved quality, indoor quality, and occupant comfort.

  • With that, here are the links to the information that I mentioned earlier and thank you once

  • again and I will turn it back over to Emily.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you Bhaskar for that excellent presentation and thank you to each

  • of our other panelists for everyone’s outstanding presentations today. We have lots of great

  • questions from the audience. Well use the remaining time to answer and discuss. Well

  • get to as many questions as we can. The first question is for Meredydd and Sha.

  • Is ECBC applicable for 100 kilowatts or 500 kilowatts? The ECBC document says 500 kilowatts.

  • Which is correct?

  • >> SHA YU: Thank you Emily. I'll take that question. This is Sha. I think the person

  • who had the question is partially right. In 2007 the original ECBC does cover the 500

  • kilowatts and above but there was an update in 2008 and to include the buildings with

  • 100 kWh and above. Right now it's 100 kWh.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you. Alright, our next question is - what is the renovation rate

  • in India for old housing and commercial buildings and how can we improve this?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Can you repeat the question Emily?

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Sure, I'm happy to repeat the question. What is the renovation rate

  • in India for old housing and commercial buildings and how can we improve this?

  • >> BHASKAR DEOL: Emily, I'm going to jump in really quickly. I do not have the figures

  • for this rate in India at the moment for all houses but it does appear anecdotally that

  • the bulk of the construction activity going on at the moment is focused around new buildings.

  • What you do see specifically in the housing sector is when a building gets to an age of

  • about 20-30 years it is more likely that it is torn down and constructed new rather than

  • being renovated. Other panelists might have another opinion.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you.

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Just to add what Bhaskar was say...Emily, can I?

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Umhum, please.

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: In commercial buildings what has been noticed over the past few years

  • is that commercial buildings are doing renovation and retrofitting for two reasons. One is for

  • aesthetics because now the trend of large glazing and better interiors and so and so

  • forth they are there. So commercial buildings are going for this reason, aesthetic reason,

  • but when they are going for retrofitting for aesthetic reasons they are also doing it energy

  • efficient. Some buildings are doing retrofitting just because there is tremendous change in

  • technology, for instance, lighting technology has changed a lot, air conditioning has changed

  • a lot. So they get a business sense of it and that is why they are doing retrofitting.

  • Recently one IT company approached us and they are doing retrofitting in all of their

  • 6 offices throughout the country. That is just an example of how retrofitting is going

  • on.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great. Thank you very much. The next question - is there any effort to

  • improve reporting of public energy consumption data, even if it's at an aggregate level?

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: This is Meredydd. So there are requirements for public buildings, for

  • new public buildings, that they have to meet GRIHAD standards and that includes some measured

  • data. So, that is some progress. At the same time I think it is step-by-step because there

  • are still many buildings without extensive energy efficiency measures and without extensive

  • metering capabilities.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great. Thank you very much. Alright, our next question is - what are the

  • market barriers in implementing energy efficiency products and services?

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: This is Meredydd again. So I think that if we flip the question on

  • its head, building energy codes in particular can serve as a huge driver for building energy

  • efficiency for the market for building energy efficiency products. We've seen this in many

  • countries around the world and I think we are starting to see it in India as well when

  • you look at the glazing market, HVAC market, and household insulation. Obviously cost is

  • an important issue and codes basically say, look, you need to consider your entire cost,

  • not just your first cost. To help you with that we are going to tell you what measures

  • you need to install that will allow you to consider full cost.

  • >> SHA YU: And just adding to that...

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: Go ahead.

  • >> SHA YU: A lot of the activities we've done to implement ECBC will also help to address

  • the barriers in general for implementation to energy efficient products and equipment.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great, thank you Meredydd and Sha. The next question is for Jyotirmay.

  • Specifically how much is the incremental cost for this project including SPV?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Including SPV the project cost is nearly double as compared to a normal

  • project, which is non-ECBC compliant. For the reason that photovoltaic system itself

  • costs a lot. In fact, now the costs have come down but when we had ordered the photovoltaic

  • systems they were relatively costly. So if I redo the project now it would be something

  • like 1.5 to 1.6 times, including SPV.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great, thank you. The next question that we have is - how can we initiate

  • ECBC norms in northeast India?

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: This is Meredydd. I think the first step is to adopt ECBC and to make

  • sure it is included in the local ULB bylaws. So while the state can adopt it, the local

  • ULBs actually have to insert it and then after that build the capacity to implement it, either

  • by building the capacity of local urban bodies to check building plans or by allowing private

  • third-parties to serve that role and building the capacity of ULBs to oversee them.

  • >> BHASKAR DEOL: Hi this is Bhaskar. I would just like to add to the excellent response

  • by Meredydd. I would say there is a significant body of resources and information that is

  • available for any state wishing to move forward with implementing the Energy Conservation

  • Building Code, both in terms of technical capacity with the likes of Dr. Mather who

  • is here with us today, Professor Michelle [inaudible 1:20:02] in Heidelberg, and then

  • a number of others but also just in terms of publications as well as the exact process

  • that the state needs to go through be it how the implementation should look like, you know,

  • what all needs to be done in terms of the bylaws. The other thing I would say on that

  • is also like the experience in Andhra Pradesh showed it is extremely important to have key

  • local stakeholders come together and really try to understand what ECBC means for the

  • state and then think through how it would be better to integrate it into the building

  • bylaws and start from there and use the excellent body of information and resources that's already

  • there. Through the Bureau of Energy Efficiency, the state bureau agencies, and other organizations

  • like IIIT and MNIT, ASCI and others.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you. Thank you for elaborating. The next question is - are there any provisions

  • for energy efficiency in electrical installations, i.e. upsizing cable to reduce joule losses.

  • If so, how are they regulated and how is it enforced and verified?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Can you repeat the question Emily?

  • >> EMILY EVANS: I'd be happy to repeat the question. Are there any provisions for energy

  • efficiency in electrical installations, for example, upsizing cable to reduced joule losses?

  • If so, how are they regulated and how is it enforced and verified?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Okay, let me try to answer the question. Well, in ECBC there is a complete

  • section on electrical power and there are broadly you can say three requirements. First

  • of all they specify the minimum required efficiency of transformers and motors. Then there is

  • a limitation on power losses. So power cables, if I can remember correctly, the power cables

  • should not register more than 1% of loss so there is definitely a provision of addressing

  • this issue in ECBC. There is a separate section in ECBC for addressing this.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you very much. The next question is for Bhaskar directly. Could you

  • elaborate on the set up in Rajasthan...sorry...I'm sure I'm getting it wrong...the ordering of

  • implementation and it's reporting that have emerged during the 16/17 months of ECBC in

  • India? Also, please inform how one can become a third-party assessor having cleared the

  • EAEM Certification of the BEE. I'm happy to repeat that if you need Bhaskar.

  • >> BHASKAR DEOL: No, sure. I'm guessing that Jyotirmay may want to weigh in on the first

  • part of the question but do maybe jump straight to the second part. I would say that in the

  • case of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana states there is an RFP, request for proposals, which

  • was put out. If an existing organization or an architect is already empaneled with the

  • Bureau of Efficiency then they automatically qualify as being a third-party assessor for

  • the Andhra Pradesh state.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great, thank you.

  • >> BHASKAR DEOL: And I think that the first part of the question was specifically addressed

  • for Rajasthan so I don't know if Jyotirmay if you wanted to talk a little bit about that?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Yeah, so in Rajasthan the mechanism for defining third-parties is

  • still under development and therefore I am not authorized to say this is the mechanism

  • but yes, it is going to be pretty much similar to what is there in Andhra Pradesh.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great.

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: In terms of the monitoring and implementation in Rajasthan, so I think

  • there are a couple of different approaches. Mostly it is ad hoc at the moment because

  • implementation is fairly new. The Rajasthan Renewable Energy Corporation oversees the

  • entire system and provides the opportunity for stakeholders to give feedback. There is

  • some data, as you have heard, about pilot projects on the performance of given buildings

  • compared to the code, as well as some information on the number of permits being pulled that

  • are ECBC compliant.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great, thank you very much. Our next question - does ECBC apply to multi-family

  • apartment complexes that have an aggregate demand of over 100 kilowatts?

  • >> SHA YU: I think the answer is no. ECBC only applies to the commercial buildings,

  • not residential for now.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you very much.

  • >> BHASKAR DEOL: Some of the states have actually clarified this. Like in Rajasthan there is

  • a separate document, which has been released by the government, which is known as Energy

  • Building Code Directives. There they have spelled out that this is clearly applicable

  • to commercial buildings, so to say non-residential buildings.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great, thank you. Our next question is - how is ECBC compatible with

  • ISL 50001 and LEED Green Building Requirements?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Well the green building requirements if you talk about LEED rating

  • system approach is in line but values may not be the same as what they require because

  • LEED by and large follows ASHRAE 90.1 values rather ECBC has values which are different

  • than the ASHRAE 90.1 values. So the philosophy is the same but the values may be different.

  • Whereas, if you go for ECBC rating system, they give an option for compliance through

  • ASHRAE values or ECBC values. Another fact is that most buildings still go for ASHRAE

  • building values for ECBC rated buildings as well. There is another rating system, which

  • is GRIHA rating system, and that other rating system is totally aligned with ECBC. So ECBC

  • requirements is sort of a prerequisite for GRIHA.

  • >> SHA YU: Adding to that part of the LEED costs more than other features like water,

  • land use, and back to the ISL 50001 question. ISL 50001 mostly covers energy management

  • so that's linked to the operational stage. ECBC covers most of the design stage.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you both. That is much appreciated. A final question and I apologize

  • to the audience. We have more questions than we have time to answer. What is the cost of

  • construction per meter for the new commercial building? What was the per meter cost for

  • the MNIT building for the new construction?

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: As I said, the cost of new construction I would request my co-presenter,

  • architect Tarush, to correct me if I'm wrong. The typical cost of construction these days

  • for a commercial building is considered to be 2,000 INR per square feet. As for our building,

  • as I said, it was about 4,000 INR per square foot but I would like to inform that there

  • were also a lot of restrictions. One was definitely the solar photovoltaic panels. Another was,

  • because this was an existing building and we were doing retrofitting and the attempt

  • was not to disturb the functioning of the ground floor when the first floor becomes

  • functional. Then we shifted to first floor. Then the construction of second floor and

  • first floor retrofitting wall started. It took much longer and therefore the labor cost,

  • as well as the material wastage, has been significantly high in this project. So I would

  • suggest not to take this value as a benchmark value, but this is definitely on the higher

  • side. If you go for a fresh project it would be much lower than 4,000 INR SVP.

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: In the US typically you are looking at cost, incremental cost, much

  • greater energy savings than available in ECBC that would be typically well under 10%. It

  • would be much closer to 5% or actually positive net present value when you look at the lifecycle

  • cost of those measures.

  • >> JYOTIRMAY MATHUR: Yes, thank you very much for pointing that out. Our incremental cost

  • is also for the reason we are going 22% beyond ECBC. If we just stop at ECBC level it has

  • rightly been said that the incremental cost would not be 10% even. In fact there can be

  • a net saving if a reduction in tonnage is discounted and that is normally the mistake

  • that people do. Building costs as the fabric cost and other costs are separate. If everything

  • has been counted and reduction of tonnage is also counted you may end up saving some

  • money in the overall cost.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Great, thank you both for that answer. It is much appreciated and thank

  • you all. Now before we take our quick evaluation I'd like to provide the panelists with an

  • opportunity to provide any additional or closing remarks that you'd like to make before we

  • conduct the evaluation and close the webinar.

  • >> MEREDYDD EVANS: I'd just like to say thank you to everyone for participating and we look

  • forward to staying in touch with several of you. You will see our presentation online

  • and please let us know. Thanks.

  • >> EMILY EVANS: Thank you, Meredydd. Great, and now Andrew, if you could please to the

  • attendee evaluation. I’d like to thank the panelists again and now I would ask the audience

  • to take a minute to answer a quick evaluation on the webinar you have viewed today. We have

  • three short questions for you to answer and your feedback is very important to us as it

  • allows us to know what we are doing well, and what we can improve. The first question

  • is, the webinar content provided me with useful information and insight. Please take a moment

  • to answer. Thank you Andrew, if you would like to display the next question. The second

  • question is, the webinars presenters were effective. And, Andrew if you would please

  • display the final question, overall the webinar met my expectations.

  • Thank you all for participating in the evaluation. On behalf of the Clean Energy Solutions Center,

  • I’d like to extend a thank you to all of our expert panelists, and to our attendees

  • for participating in today’s Webinar. Weve had a terrific audience, and we very much

  • appreciate your time. I invite our attendees to check the Solutions Center web site if

  • you would like to view the slides and listen to a recording of today’s presentation,

  • as well as previously held webinars. Additionally, we are now posting webinar recordings on the

  • Clean Energy Solution Center YouTube channel. Please allow about one week for the audio

  • recording to be posted. We also invite you to inform your colleagues and those in your

  • networks about Solutions Center resources and services, including no-cost policy support.

  • Have a great rest of your day and we hope to see you again at future Clean Energy Solutions

  • Center events. This concludes our webinar.

>> EMILY EVANS: Hello everyone! I’m Emily Evans with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory,

Subtitles and vocabulary

Click the word to look it up Click the word to find further inforamtion about it