BestPractice Presentation

1
Windows RD ENERGY STAR at WDMAs Technical
Meeting Chicago May 11, 2005
Marc LaFrance, CEM Technology Development
Manager US DOE, Buildings Technology Program
2
Building Technologies Mission

• Its mission is to develop technologies, tools,
  and techniques for making residential and
  commercial buildings more energy efficient,
  productive, and affordable.

3
BT Organization
Program ManagerBuilding Technologies
Michael J. McCabe
Team Leader Commercial
John D. Ryan

• Windows
• Envelope
• Lighting
• Equipment

4
Building Technologies Goal

• By 2025, the Building Technologies Program will
  create technologies and design approaches that
  enable the construction of net-zero energy
  buildings at low incremental cost.

5
BT GOAL Establish the technical capability
combining conservation with renewables that
enable the construction of net-zero energy
buildings (ZEB) at low incremental cost.

• GOAL A Residential Develop marketable advanced
  energy systems required to reduce residential
  energy use with the following performance
  milestones
• 40-50 Energy Use Reduction 2004
• 50-60 Energy Use Reduction 2010
• 60-70 Energy Use Reduction 2015
• Zero Energy Buildings 2020
• GOAL B Commercial Develop marketable advanced
  components and systems to reduce commercial
  energy use with the following performance
  milestones
• 25-30 Energy Use Reduction 2004
• 30-50 Energy Use Reduction 2010
• 60-70 Energy Use Reduction 2020
• Zero Energy Buildings 2025

6
Moving to ZEB will require significant technical
advances to meet performance and cost targets
7
(No Transcript)
8

• 2002 ZEH
• Low-E windows
• Geothermal heat pump
• Passive solar heating
• 2 kW Solar water heating
• 6 kW Solar electricity
• 75,000 incremental costs

• 2020 ZEH
• Building-integrated solar thermal solar
  electric
• 4 kW Solar water heating space heating
• 4 kW Solar electricity
• Whole-house energy automation system
• Advanced Envelope, including
• Dynamic and highly insulating windows
• Advanced Equipment, including
• High Efficiency Refrigerator
• High Efficiency Compact Fluorescent Lighting
• SEER 15 Variable-Speed 2 ton A/C (Conventional
  Home used 4 ton A/C)
• 20,000 incremental costs

9
Solar and Energy Efficiency
10
Energy Consumption in Buildings
Total Building Envelope Energy Loss 13.4 quads
(Windows 4.7 quads) 13.9 of Energy in US
Economy and about 3.5 of the world.
11
(No Transcript)
12
The structure of a commercial building impacts to
the heating and cooling consumption, both
reducing and creating loads.
Commercial Cooling Losses
Commercial Heating Gains

• Sources
• Department of Energy, BTS Core Databook, 2004

13
The structure of a commercial building impacts to
the heating and cooling consumption, both
reducing and creating loads.
Commercial Cooling Gains
Commercial Heating Losses

• Note"Loads" represents the thermal energy
  losses/gains that, when combined, will be offset
  by a building's heating/cooling system to create
  comfortable environment
• Sources
• Department of Energy, BTS Core Databook, 2004

14
U.S. Energy Use - Windows

• Building Energy Use 34.6 Quads, (U.S. 96.2
  Quads)
• Residential Buildings 19.2 Quads
• Commercial Buildings 15.4 Quads
• Windows 5.7 Quads or 5 US Energy (15 Bldgs)
• Energy consumption impacts
• Residential Heating 2.6 Quads
• Residential Cooling 0.8 Quads
• Commercial Heating 0.7 Quads
• Commercial Cooling 0.6 Quads
• Commercial Lighting 1.0 Quads (potential from
  3.8 Q total)
• Economic Impact
• Annual energy cost 35B
• Annual window sales 10 - 15B??
• (based on data in US DOE Core Data Book, 2001,
  Tables 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.2.3, 1.2.10, 1.3.3,
  1.3.9)

15
Technology Roadmapping

• Opportunity for leaders from industry, academia,
  research communities, and DOE to develop a mutual
  vision
• Assist DOE in focusing the direction of future
  RD to foster next generation building
  technologies
• Assess near-term RD focus for joint
  industry/federal investment
• Create a better RD portfolio for building
  envelope and windows technologies
• Maintain a continuing dialogue

16
DOE Windows Roadmap Process
January 5-6, 1999 Leesburg, VA
Spring 2000
Sept. 23-24, 1998 Chicago, IL
July - October 1999
January - July 1999
1
3
2
4
5
Executive Forum
Roadmap Development Workshop
Roadmap Review Workshop
Roadmap Publication
Industry Survey

• History of the fenestration industry
• Context for the window industry vision
• Vision statement elements

• Refined vision statement
• Identified ranked barriers
• Identified possible actions to overcome barriers

• Review and modify Roadmap Document

• DOE program alignment competitive solicitation

• Described specific research needs
• Relative level of investment certainty of
  success
• Potential contribution to achieving the Vision

May 5, 2004 Chicago, IL
December 10-12, 2002 Chicago, IL
October 16, 2003 Phoenix, AZ
Implementation
Implementation
Implementation

• Mini research plan development
• Prioritization
• Identification of needs area for competition

• Prioritization
• Annual report card

• Interim Update
• Prioritization

17
Where Our Interests Converge
DOE
MutualInterest
Industry
18
Major Components of Window RD Program
Stakeholder Priorities Chicago December 2002

• Technology Development
• Dynamic windows
• Highly Insulating Windows
• Daylighting Control
• Advanced Facades

• Technology Support
• Design/rating tools
• Durability and Product Life Time
• Efficient product promotion
• Installation (Interfaces Envelope Workshop)

19
Roadmap Activity Next Steps

• Prepare material for distribution to key
  organizations, e.g. WDMA, AAMA, NFRC, IGMA, GANA,
  ASHRAE, etc
• Receive broad input associated with DOEs
  technology support activity and establish
  industrys priorities
• Next public meeting TBD (This coming
  Fall/Winter)

20
Total Building Envelope and Window RD Budget
21
Competitive Solicitation

• FY03

Dynamic Windows
Highly Insulating Windows

• Aspen Aerogel

• Rockwell Scientific
• Sage Electrochromics

FY04
Dynamic Windows
Highly Insulating Windows

• Traco Commercial Frames

• Universal Display Tranparent OLEDs

22
Interested in DOE RD?
These five opportunities with DOE could further
your research visions!
Technology Maturity Continuum
23
DOE Funding Opportunities

• Office of Science, Annual Solicitation Process.
  http//www.sc.doe.gov/production/grants/fr02-01.ht
  ml
• Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,
  Energy Efficient Building Equipment and Envelope
  Technologies V. FY05 Follow-on May
• http//www.netl.doe.gov/business/
• Office of Science, Small Business Innovative RD.
  http//sbir.er.doe.gov/sbir
• Office of Industrial Technology, Invention and
  Innovation. http//www.oit.doe.gov/inventions/soli
  citations.shtml

24
U.S. Window Market Significant Achievement(25
years in the Residential market)

• 1973 Typical Window
• clear, single glazed,
• double or storm window in north,
• Uaverage .85 BTU/hr-F-sq.ft.
• 2002 Typical Window
• 95 double glazed
• 50 have a low-E coating
• 30-65 energy savings vs. 1973
• Uaverage .45 BTU/hr-F-sq.ft.

25
Technical Targets
Technical Targets Advanced Windows
Represents component durability, system
reliability will be address in future years lt
20K cycles Low 20K 50K Cycles Medium gt
50K Cycles High
26
Advanced Windows Can Become Energy Producers

• Double Glaze U 0.5

Low e U .35 (Energy Star)
R6 Window U 0.17(Dynamic Niche)
R10 Window U 0.10 (Dynamic Wide Spread)
- Loss
Gain
1980
2000
1973
2010
2020
1990
27
Super Insulating and Dynamic Windows As we move
towards ZEB, windows will play an important role
and offer a large opportunity for energy savings
Increasing levels of performance
Bars above black line represent window energy load
28
Savings from Better WindowsHeating Climate
DOE-2 Annual Heating Cost
Double Glazed Energy 1218
Double w/Low-E Energy 1120
Next Generation Window Energy 960
Single Glazed w/Storm Energy 1310
(House with no windows 1000/yr)
29
Commercial Field TrialBerkeley, CA

• Project
• Energy peak demand savings
• Human factors evaluation

• Participants
• California Energy Commission
• Dept. of Energy
• SAGE Electrochromics
• Wausau Window Wall System

30
Residential Field TrialHouston, TX

• Project
• Demonstrate cooling energy peak demand savings
• Evaluate HVAC impact

• Participants
• SAGE Electrochromics
• Andersen Window
• Emerald Homes
• HUD NAHB Research Center

31
Thermal Example of Higher Performing Windows
Dual, Clear, Alum. spacer
Dual, Clear, Foam spacer
Dual, Low-e, Foam spacer
Superwindow,4-lites, low-e, Kr
-6.0C
20C
32
Key DOE RD Activities
Dynamic Windows

• Sage Electrochromics Initial commercialization,
  increasing size, improving system reliability and
  controls, new products in 2006. 100 RD Award
  2004.
• Rockwell Scientific Reflective Mirror
  Fundamental Research, 30 x 30 cm prototype this
  summer
• Universal Display Proof of concept for
  transparent OLED, late this year
• LBNL Reflective Hydride, 2.5 x 2.5 cm prototype
  this summer. 100 RD Award 2004.
• LANL Ionic Tint Organic Initial small
  prototypes built and tested, improvements
  continue
• NREL Supercapacitor surface EC, proof of
  concept completed
• Pleotint Material optimization for
  thermochromic devices, funded out of Innovation
  and Inventions Program

33
Highly Insulating Windows
Key DOE RD Activities

• Aspen Aerogel Fundamental material development
  for transparent aerogels, small prototypes
  developed, precursor material cost reduction.
• LBNL Low cost options for thin film and
  interior baffles that are easy to produce and are
  light weight, prototypes being tested in IR
  Camera Facility
• TRACO Developing low e surface treatment for
  aluminum frames, improved thermal breaks, cavity
  insulation, etc to get significant reduction in U
  value for commercial windows

34
Technology Support
Key DOE RD Activities

• NFRC Support for its RD activity
• LBNL Continues with suite of rating and design
  tools, Windows, Therm, Optics, Glazing Database,
  RESFEN, COMFEN, etc
• LBNL Beta version of Windows 6 is available for
  testing uses ray tracing for blinds, opaque
  glass, fritted glass, etc
• NREL Durability on advanced window samples
• Aspen Research IGU durability study, almost
  complete

35
Technology Support - Information
Key DOE RD Activities

• Efficient Window Collaborative
  www.efficientwindows.org
• Commercial Fenestration - http//www.commercialwin
  dows.umn.edu/index.html
• RD Forum www.govforums.org/ew

36
ENERGY STAR

• Current 4 climate zones in place since May 2003
  and will not change for quite some time
• Manufacturer assistance to promote energy
  efficient products
• Qualifying criteria http//www.energystar.gov/inde
  x.cfm?cwindows_doors.pr_crit_windows
• Manufacturer Resources http//www.energystar.gov/i
  ndex.cfm?cmanuf_res.pt_windows

37
Performance Based Rating System Activity

• DOE initiated process in September of 2003 to
  consider the adoption of an alternative path to
  qualify for ENERGY STAR (U value /SHGC Trade-off)
• Multiple rounds of analysis and comments were
  received see http//www.govforums.org/ew/
• Current criteria will not change
• DOE issued its decision this week to implement a
  Performance Based Rating System for the South and
  South Central (without CA) zones

38
New Criteria
39
Alternative Path

• Allows trade-offs in Southern and South/Central,
  excluding California
• Does not allow trade-offs in Northern or
  North/Central
• Trade-offs deliver equivalent average energy
  performance (population weighted) when integrated
  over the specific region

40
Rationale Includes

• South/Central zone (excluding CA) limited
  trade-offs work, but U-factors required are below
  most aluminum windows in the NFRC database,
  opportunity for investment
• Southern zone trade-offs work and allow for
  hurricane windows to be compliant
• Laminated Low-E glass for constructing
  increasingly popular impact-resistant hurricane
  windows have higher U-factors
• These windows cannot routinely meet the
  prescriptive U-factor criteria, but can deliver
  equivalent energy performance with lower SHGCs

41
Rationale Excludes

• Northern zone ENERGY STAR U-factor is set at
  same level as IECC 2000 prescriptive
  requirements, allows no latitude for a trade-off
• North/Central zone the current criteria are
  close to optimal across the entire region,
  leaving no room for trade-offs
• California is excluded from South/Central
  because viable trade-offs did not work when it
  was included. (CA has very large populations
  living in moderate climates)
• Skylights are excluded because the analysis did
  not encompass them skylights represent less than
  5 of the window market

42
Rationale
Proposed amendment meets Departments stated
goals

• Offers equal or greater average energy savings
  than the current prescriptive criteria
• Provides greater flexibility in U-factor
  performance ratings
• Meets or exceeds prescriptive building energy
  codes in the applicable regions
• Has no other adverse market impacts
• Enhances the value of the overall program

43
Recent Code Activity
RD Perspective - LaFrance

• EC 31 (Adoption of Canadian Trade-Off System)
• While system provides appropriate benefit for
  passive heating in the north which is critical to
  achieve zero energy homes, algorithms and data
  are based on Canadian heating only climate.
• Well analyzed metrics need to be established to
  properly address northern trade-off issues while
  not ignoring peak electricity demand concerns.
• EC 61 66 (Commercial Fenestration Table 802)
• Joint DOE RD and Code position presented at
  hearings
• Code structured policies limit far reaching
  solutions, current compromise appears to be
  significantly better than previous requirements
  (e.g. same SHGC in Miami as Boston)
• Longer term issues regarding structural issues
  correlated to energy performance could be
  pursued, DOE RD willing to assist industry as
  needed

44
Contact Data

• P. Marc LaFrance
• US Department of Energy
• 1J-018, EE-2J
• 1000 Independence Ave, SW
• Washington, DC 20585-0121
• (202)5869142
• marc.lafrance_at_ee.doe.gov
• www.govforums.org/ew/