Building Energy Audits for Residential or Commercial Buildings

Photo by Piljae Im, ORNL

Note that this challenge was for the Fall 2020 competition.

The objective of this challenge is to develop technical solutions to expedite energy audits or develop a simplified, yet effective, energy audit methodology, by finding ways to reduce time and cost compared to current audit practices. In addition to proposing solutions, this challenge also asks teams to demonstrate the proposed energy audit solution on an existing building.

Background

Buildings, whether long-standing or recently constructed, have potential for energy improvements. Engineers uncover the energy improvement potential for these buildings through thorough inspection, survey of systems and review of past energy usage; a practice commonly referred to as an energy audit.

Energy audits are used in both the residential and the commercial building sectors. An energy audit is a process and inspection survey to understand the energy use of the building and to identify opportunities to improve energy efficiency while maintaining or improving occupants’ comfort. In addition to this, energy audits can be used for energy efficient building certification (e.g. Home Energy Rating System Program [HERS], U.S. Green Building Council [USGBC] Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design [LEED]). The energy audit can range from a simple walk-through of the building to a detailed audit with onsite measurements, tests, and analysis of many, if not all, building systems. ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers) provides industry with three standardized levels of energy audits where thorough on-site investigation is required as audit complexity increases.¹

Simple energy audits (ASHRAE Level 1) include a review of utility bills, interviews with building staff, and a walk-through of the building. The purpose of this audit is to identify energy inefficiency and provide recommendations to building owners regarding operational adjustments or system upgrades with cost-effective energy efficiency measures (EEMs). For example, inefficient lightbulbs can be replaced with energy-efficient lightbulbs, such as LEDs. Simply replacing old filters of heating and cooling equipment can save energy by increasing filtration effectiveness and maintaining superior indoor air quality.² These recommendations are easily identified by a building walk-through and easily implemented by building owners or facility managers where immediate energy savings can be anticipated. Major problem areas can be uncovered by simple energy audits, but level 1 energy audits are often not sufficient for implementing more significant measures and in that case, more detailed energy audits are recommended. Also, the lack of granularity of utility bills reduces the potential for diagnostics and other data processing techniques. In addition, many buildings today are equipped with a vast array of sensors that could provide more meaningful analyses and insight into a building’s operation. Wireless sensors and data acquisition also offers new potential for improving our ability to quickly and efficiently understand energy performance of an existing building. More detailed energy audits (ASHRAE Level 2 and Level 3) provide a comprehensive understanding of the energy usage of building and enables advanced energy efficiency measures and future investment planning. By examining the condition of building envelope and HVAC systems, and operations and maintenance procedures, a baseline for energy usage can be developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pre-selected EEMs.³ For example, a blower door test⁴ or tracer gas test⁵ can be performed to identify air leakage or determine the air tightness of the building. Insulation level of the building can be identified based on as-built drawing, while thermal bridging or insufficient insulation can be identified using an IR camera⁶ together with a blower door test. Remote building energy audit services using new technologies such as advanced data mining techniques or machine learning are under active development.^7,8 These potential EEMs, which are identified through detailed energy audits, can be evaluated and prioritized using whole-building energy simulation tools (e.g., EnergyPlus, OpenStudio).

Detailed audits are more expensive and time consuming, and they require more detailed field data but can be necessary to plan an appropriate path forward. Because Level 2 and 3 audits are expensive, they are not performed often, especially for residential buildings, and so significant energy savings are left unrealized.

The Challenge

The JUMP into STEM competition is looking for technical solutions to expedite the audit process or develop a simplified but more effective audit method, by finding ways to reduce time and cost.

Possible solutions could be related to any required tasks in any of the three levels of energy audit (e.g. energy bill analysis, review mechanical and electrical system, building air tightness testing) and many aspects of building (e.g., building envelope, HVAC system, lighting system) to improve the current system for energy efficiency and occupants’ comfort. In addition to proposing solutions, this challenge also asks the teams to test their proposed solution by conducting the energy audit at a local building. Engaging with a local building owner or homeowner can be a great way to identify improvements in the solution as well as identify EEMs for the owner or homeowner.

Solutions may address either residential or commercial buildings and should include the following:

The proposed technical solution and how the solution will benefit or improve the audit process
Site assessment including a virtual visit, virtual interviews of building staff if necessary (e.g., homeowner, facility managers, operations and management staff)
Energy usage analysis (e.g., collect and analyze at least one year of utility data)
The expected impact of the energy audit; examples of impact include energy saving potential using a whole building energy simulation tool (e.g., EnergyPlus, OpenStudio) or other relevant methods to capture the scientific effects of the propose method, economic benefit, and indoor environment comfort
Feedback on energy audit outcomes (e.g., a list of recommended EEMs, cost-benefit analysis) from the homeowner, local building staff, etc.)
A technology-to-market plan for how to scale up this solution to make an impact on the building industry

Downloadable Challenge Description

Additional Challenge Resources

Requirements

Competing in this challenge is open to student teams currently enrolled in U.S. universities and colleges. See the Terms and Conditions for eligibility requirements. Please note that you must begin your Building Technologies Internship Program (BTIP) application before or at the same time as you submit your idea in order to compete in the JUMP competition.

Please submit the following as one PDF document.

Project Team Background (up to 2 pages, single-spaced)
- - Form a team of 2 to 4 students. These students represent the project team, and will all consult on the problem.
  - The Project Team Background should include:
    - Project name, team name, and collegiate institution(s)
    - Team mission statement
    - A short biography for each team member. Include information such as major, level (freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, graduate), and other relevant background information such as experience with building science, future career goals, and formative experiences that shaped each individual’s contribution to the challenge.
    - Diversity Statement (one paragraph 5-7 sentences): One of JUMP into STEM’s key objectives is to encourage diversity of thought and background in students entering the building science industry. There is a diversity gap in the industry, meaning that it is underrepresented by certain groups—including, but not limited to, those based on race, ethnicity, and gender—and this gap needs to be addressed. Diversity of thought can be achieved through teams consisting of students from different majors and minors. As part of the next generation of building science thought leaders and researchers, you have a unique opportunity to influence this industry. Please describe how your team is contributing to diversity in building science
- - The Project Team Background does not count toward the 5-page Project Challenge Submission.

Project Challenge Submission (up to 5 pages, single-spaced)
- Select one of the three challenges to address
- Investigate the background of the challenge and consider related stakeholders. Stakeholders are those who are affected by the problem as well as those who may have decision-making power and provide solutions (technical or nontechnical, such as policies). Include any market stakeholders, such as manufacturers.
- Write a one- to two-paragraph problem statement, focusing on a specific aspect of the problem and a stakeholder group affected by the problem. The stakeholder group can be from a specific location, socioeconomic status, age, or demographic (e.g., people living in subsidized housing).
- Write a technical solution or process that addresses or solves the specific problem from your problem statement. Address the requirements for your selected challenge. Include graphs, figures, and photos.
- Develop a one- to two-paragraph technology-to-market plan that describes how the team envisions bringing their idea from paper concept to being installed on real buildings or integrated into the design of real buildings. Include cost and benefit analyses in the technology-to-market plan. This does not need to be exhaustive and should focus on comparing the solution to current or existing practices. Benefits such as building energy reductions and improved occupant health or productivity should be evaluated.

Appendix (optional, no page limit)
- Teams may wish to add an appendix. This is optional and might not be reviewed by the judges.
- The appendix has no page limit.

Evaluation Criteria

Technical (40%)

Technical solution or process: how well the proposed technology addresses the problem.
Technical feasibility: the solution’s technical feasibility/potential, including the viability of the proposed technology. For example, solutions that are not technically possible or that lack a technical feasibility discussion will receive lower scores.
Technology-to-market plan: the proposed technology-to-market plan, including the team’s cost/benefit analysis of the solution. How technically feasible is the proposed plan to bring the solution from a paper concept to installation or integration with real buildings or building designs? Costs and benefits can include both monetary and non-monetary evaluations.
Technical response: how well the team’s written submission responds to the technical requests of the challenge.

Innovation (30%)

Market characterization and readiness for proposed idea: team’s description and understanding of the market and how the solution will create economic value to drive industry adoption.
Replicability and scalability: team’s description on how they will produce the product cost-effectively and scale the idea beyond original prototypes.
Novelty: the originality and creativity of the solution and how significant the contribution will be to the building industry.

Diversity and Applicability (30%)

Diversity statement: how well the team addresses the diversity gap in the building science industry in the diversity statement. This includes how the team brings perspectives from a variety of backgrounds, including students from groups that are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). This also includes students from many different disciplines—diversity of thought.
Stakeholder engagement: how well the team understands their stakeholder community and creates a problem statement around this community’s challenges.
Applicability to stakeholders: how well the solution addresses the problem statement and associated stakeholder community.

How to Create a Successful Submission

Slides

Citations

Advanced Building Construction Methods

Photo by Dennis Schroeder, NREL 41378

Note that this challenge was for the Fall 2020 competition.

The objective of this challenge is to develop an innovative solution incorporating substantial changes in building materials or construction methods, leading to benefits such as increased productivity and worker safety through reduced construction time, reduced cost and waste, improvements to occupant comfort and health, and reduced energy use.

Background

The building construction industry has been largely the same over the past century¹ but has the potential to transform thanks to recent advancements in manufacturing, fabrication, materials, and logistics. Presently, we use traditional construction methods, including transporting building components individually, for on-site construction. Advances in materials and methods have improved energy efficiency, indoor air quality, and occupant comfort, and novel construction practices could maximize the benefits from these advancements. The Department of Energy’s Advanced Building Construction (ABC) initiative, which is led by the Building Technologies Office (BTO), is specifically focusing on integrating energy efficient solutions into highly productive U.S. construction practices for new buildings and retrofits.²

There have been significant advances in manufacturing processes and material science in recent years, and while industries such as vehicle and airline manufacturing have taken advantage of these improvements to build vehicles that are lighter, more durable, and more energy efficient, the construction industry is slower to adapt. Significant opportunities exist for radical improvements in the building construction industry, and we should look to the technologies developed in other manufacturing industries for inspiration. Dramatic changes to how buildings are built and what materials are used could lead to improvements in energy efficiency, worker safety, occupant health and comfort, new business opportunities and reduced costs, as well as more specific improvements in flexible usage or rapid on-site construction.

Recent Developments

The building construction industry has recently seen several companies modularizing the construction process and building portions of buildings (walls or apartment units) in an assembly-line-style factory.^3,4 This allows construction to occur indoors, unaffected by weather, and reduces completion time by creating tasks that can either be automated or improved by repetition. Modularization offers many new business opportunities and new jobs while simultaneously improving worker safety. In addition, the cost of construction is lower—potentially up to 20% less⁵—and streamlined because of these process improvements, but companies are still generally using traditional construction materials and methods. Cost savings under current practices come from buying material in bulk and reducing on-site delays from weather, among other things.

Novel and innovative solutions for materials or manufacturing processes could lead to dramatic improvements in energy efficiency, durability, and other amenities. 3D printing and increasing the use of automation are examples of innovative methods that have been applied to buildings, but there are likely other new processes and materials that could also be used in building construction.^6,7,8 Energy savings, improved occupant comfort, and indoor environment can also be achieved by increasing the precision of the materials (less air leakage, for example) and by reducing the time that materials are exposed to the elements.

Other benefits could be realized by bringing more creativity to building construction. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced us to rethink how offices should be configured, what meets the definition of a hospital, and even how our homes are used.⁹ Our buildings are currently designed and built for a single primary use, and changing that requires significant construction for remodeling. Are there ways of using novel materials and designs to make buildings more configurable, such as changes to the way interior walls (and all the embedded infrastructure) are built to be more conducive to adaptation? Another potential driver could be localized disaster response. The Federal Emergency Management Agency often delivers trailers for temporary housing following disasters such as hurricanes or forest fires.¹⁰ What if temporary housing that is durable, energy efficient, and comfortable could be prebuilt and flat-packed, ready to be shipped to places of need with minimal notice? And then deconstructed, relocated, and repurposed as needed?

The Challenge

If you are not limited by traditional building materials or methods, what could you do? If you do not need to build a house (or other building) at the site but could build pieces in a factory, what could you do? What materials could you incorporate that would not work well when building vertical walls? (Maybe a material that starts off as a liquid?) Could you create a totally different paradigm for buildings, such as easily reconfigurable rooms? Are there aspects to how buildings are built today that are practical but result in missed opportunities for improving health, comfort, or environmental impact?

This challenge is to develop an innovative solution incorporating substantial changes in building materials or construction methods, leading to benefits such as increased productivity through reduced construction time, brand new business models or jobs, improvements to worker safety, reduced cost and waste, improvements to occupant comfort and health, and reduced energy use. Other benefits, such as creating flexible interior spaces, can also be a key driver. The solution could include one or more of the following strategies:

Propose the application of a new construction method. This new method does not have to be completely novel but could be an existing process used in other manufacturing sectors. The solution will include details of how this process can be applied to buildings and why it is an improvement over traditional methods.
Propose the application of a new material in buildings. The material does not have to be completely novel but could be an existing material that has not been widely used in buildings. The solution will include details of the material, its benefits, and how it will be used in building construction, as well as a discussion around why it is an improvement over traditional materials.
Propose a solution for buildings that will allow rooms to be more easily reconfigured, which can be beneficial during extreme circumstances like a pandemic, but will also be beneficial under normal circumstances such as an increase or decrease in on-site employees for commercial buildings or special events.
Propose a solution that takes advantage of new construction processes, new materials, or both to substantially improve the functionality of disaster-relief housing in both design and logistics.
Propose a solution in building materials, construction methods, or design that promotes concepts of a circular economy aimed at eliminating waste and encouraging continual use of resources, such as designing for disassembly and re-use.

All solutions must include a cost/benefit analysis. New processes, methods, and materials typically experience elevated initial costs and the following questions should be considered:

How will costs be reduced in order to get to large-scale adoption?
How do those costs compare to the cost of traditional best practices?
What benefits will the new solution bring that might outweigh costs?
Are there new business models that could be used to sell the solution?

Cost estimates should focus on those new processes, methods, and/or materials compared with current practices. Cost estimates need not be exhaustive to the entire construction process. Benefits must also be quantified, including energy efficiency, occupant comfort and health, and/or building flexibility.

Solutions may address single-family residences, multifamily housing, or commercial buildings, and should include:

The proposed approach
The construction method or building material and information about its current use and properties
Details about how the proposed changes will integrate with traditional building methods and components, when necessary
Discuss appropriate and expected impacts and benefits of the proposed solution, which could include costs, time of construction, new business models, energy usage, occupant health, worker safety, and increased productivity
A technology-to-market plan for how to scale up this solution to make an impact on the building industry. The construction industry includes many different companies and radical change does not come easily, so the technology-to-market plan should also address how to scale-up this solution such that an impact on the building industry can be made.

Downloadable Challenge Description

Additional Challenge Resources

Requirements

Please submit the following as one PDF document.

Project Team Background (up to 2 pages, single-spaced)
- Form a team of 2 to 4 students. These students represent the project team, and will all consult on the problem.
- The Project Team Background should include:
  - Project name, team name, and collegiate institution(s)
  - Team mission statement
  - A short biography for each team member. Include information such as major, level (freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, graduate), and other relevant background information such as experience with building science, future career goals, and formative experiences that shaped each individual’s contribution to the challenge.
  - Diversity Statement (one paragraph 5-7 sentences): One of JUMP into STEM’s key objectives is to encourage diversity of thought and background in students entering the building science industry. There is a diversity gap in the industry, meaning that it is underrepresented by certain groups—including, but not limited to, those based on race, ethnicity, and gender—and this gap needs to be addressed. Diversity of thought can be achieved through teams consisting of students from different majors and minors. As part of the next generation of building science thought leaders and researchers, you have a unique opportunity to influence this industry. Please describe how your team is contributing to diversity in building science
- The Project Team Background does not count toward the 5-page Project Challenge Submission.

Project Challenge Submission (up to 5 pages, single-spaced)
- Select one of the three challenges to address
- Investigate the background of the challenge and consider related stakeholders. Stakeholders are those who are affected by the problem as well as those who may have decision-making power and provide solutions (technical or nontechnical, such as policies). Include any market stakeholders, such as manufacturers.
- Write a one- to two-paragraph problem statement, focusing on a specific aspect of the problem and a stakeholder group affected by the problem. The stakeholder group can be from a specific location, socioeconomic status, age, or demographic (e.g., people living in subsidized housing).
- Write a technical solution or process that addresses or solves the specific problem from your problem statement. Address the requirements for your selected challenge. Include graphs, figures, and photos.
- Develop a one- to two-paragraph technology-to-market plan that describes how the team envisions bringing their idea from paper concept to being installed on real buildings or integrated into the design of real buildings. Include cost and benefit analyses in the technology-to-market plan. This does not need to be exhaustive and should focus on comparing the solution to current or existing practices. Benefits such as building energy reductions and improved occupant health or productivity should be evaluated.

Appendix (optional, no page limit)
- Teams may wish to add an appendix. This is optional and might not be reviewed by the judges.
- The appendix has no page limit.

Evaluation Criteria

Technical (40%)

Technical solution or process: how well the proposed technology addresses the problem.
Technical feasibility: the solution’s technical feasibility/potential, including the viability of the proposed technology. For example, solutions that are not technically possible or that lack a technical feasibility discussion will receive lower scores.
Technology-to-market plan: the proposed technology-to-market plan, including the team’s cost/benefit analysis of the solution. How technically feasible is the proposed plan to bring the solution from a paper concept to installation or integration with real buildings or building designs? Costs and benefits can include both monetary and non-monetary evaluations.
Technical response: how well the team’s written submission responds to the technical requests of the challenge.

Innovation (30%)

Market characterization and readiness for proposed idea: team’s description and understanding of the market and how the solution will create economic value to drive industry adoption.
Replicability and scalability: team’s description on how they will produce the product cost-effectively and scale the idea beyond original prototypes.
Novelty: the originality and creativity of the solution and how significant the contribution will be to the building industry.

Diversity and Applicability (30%)

Diversity statement: how well the team addresses the diversity gap in the building science industry in the diversity statement. This includes how the team brings perspectives from a variety of backgrounds, including students from groups that are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). This also includes students from many different disciplines—diversity of thought.
Stakeholder engagement: how well the team understands their stakeholder community and creates a problem statement around this community’s challenges.
Applicability to stakeholders: how well the solution addresses the problem statement and associated stakeholder community.