Commissioning and Resilience

Original Photo by Martin Adams on Unsplash

By Duke Graham

To couple sustainability and resilience feels like giving in a little. In a sense, sustainability is preventing things from going wrong. And resilience is being ready for when they do go wrong. These are not complete definitions of course, and the link between the two ideas is deep and significant. Since shocks and stresses to our communities and systems are inevitable, it’s clear that being prepared and responsive will facilitate our sustained safety and prosperity.

The commissioning process, a cornerstone of sustainability strategy in the built environment, resides in the Venn Diagram overlap between the sustainability and resilience. Like a fire drill, other critical systems should be tested periodically to ensure their readiness when needed. In addition to verifying energy efficiency and reduced emissions, commissioning on an ongoing basis is important tool for evaluating and managing risk from a variety of scenarios. Indeed, Retro-Commissioning is included as a key to Step 3 of the Building Resilience Los Angeles – A Primer for Facilities, a Project of USGBC-LA (link). To support resilience, the commissioning process should be applied to systems that will be critical during emergencies. These include not only fire and life safety systems, but energy generation and storage, water supply and purification equipment, and food supply systems, among others.

Particularly in large cities, the importance of connected resources and access to data is enormous. When emergencies happen, key buildings and infrastructure will play critical roles in supporting the community. Data and trend analysis is a key component of ongoing commissioning of systems. Real-time snapshots of actual operations under different conditions provide a more complete verification that a system is working as intended. “Big Data” is a charged concept, and many challenges lie in the creation of data frameworks for resilience. But it’s possible that valuable resilience data is already being, or could be, collected and conditioned to help make decisions during emergencies.

For example, an earthquake or fire could interrupt water and power supplies to many people. A database of stored energy and water with actual capacity, quality and accessibility data could be used to direct the resources to those who need them. Electricity infrastructure technology is probably closer to realizing this goal. Smart grids can isolate local grids and tap into local storage and renewables to provide stable power for critical systems. An analogous smart water “grid” could provide emergency water supplies by emulating the protocols of the electrical counterpart. And like, or even during, drills like the Great Shakeout, these systems should be tested and verified as part of routing ongoing commissioning.

The City of LA is already requiring buildings to benchmark their energy use. The EBEWE ordinance uses an existing data platform, Energy Star Portfolio Manager (link) to manage the data. This platform has fields for water and even waste management. With some minor additions, useful resilience data could be mined from this and other platforms. A simple list of certain building types with a minimum amount of renewable or stored energy/water could be a valuable resource to make us more prepared and responsive.

Commissioning provides confidence that systems will work right when called on. To be fully prepared to respond to shocks or stressors, commissioning should be integrated into resilience frameworks and policy.

An Energy Comparison: LEED v3 / v4

While much of the focus of LEED v4 has been on the materials, the energy credits also experienced significant changes. One major new requirement is that the commissioning design review is a part of the fundamental commissioning prerequisite. This means that all LEED projects must engage a commissioning agent during the design phase. The minimum energy performance prerequisite also requires analysis to be done during the design phase, and the referenced energy standard has been updated to ASHRAE 90.1-2010. ASHRAE 90.1-2010 includes many new mandatory requirements, that all projects must comply with, such as controlled receptacles and daylighting controls. Luckily, most projects in California are likely to meet those mandatory requirements, as well as the commissioning design review, simply by complying with Title 24.

For LEED Commercial Interiors projects, the way energy efficiency points are awarded has been changed as well. In LEED v3, a project could earn all the points by prescriptively complying separately with the HVAC, lighting, and process load credits. In version 4, that option is still available, but a project cannot earn all the points available. In order to maximize energy efficiency points, a project will need to run a tenant level energy model using ASHRAE 90.1-2010.

Measurement and verification has also undergone a radical transformation. Projects will no longer be required to create and implement an M&V plan. In order to achieve the new Advanced Energy Metering Credit, projects will only have to install submeters on significant end uses. Additionally, a new prerequisite has been created which requires all projects to have building level energy meters. For most projects this won’t be a concern, but some campus projects will need to submeter out each building.

LEED v4 recognizes the variety of different services a high-quality commissioning agent can provide. Unlike LEED v3, where Enhanced Commissioning was all or nothing, LEED v4 has a few different Enhanced Commissioning options to choose from. Projects can choose to have their commissioning agent perform Enhanced Commissioning with or without Monitoring Based Commissioning. Additionally, projects using the building design and construction rating system can choose to pursue Envelope Commissioning as well.