LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide For District

LEEDCANADA2009
INTERPRETATIONGUIDEFOR
DISTRICTENERGYSYSTEMS
LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS
PREFACE FROM THE CaGBC

The built environment has a profound impact on our natural environment, economy, health, and
productivity. Breakthroughs in building science, technology, and operations are now available to designers,
builders, operators, and owners who want to build green and maximize both economic and environmental
performance.
The green building movement offers an unprecedented opportunity to respond to the most important
challenges of our time, including global climate change, dependence on non sustainable and expensive
sources of energy, and threats to human health. The work of innovative building professionals is a
fundamental driving force in the green building movement. Such leadership is a critical component to
achieving the Canada Green Building Councils (CaGBCs) vision of a transformed built environment leading
to a sustainable future.
CaGBC Membership
The CaGBCs greatest strength is the diversity of our membership. CaGBC is a balanced, consensus based
not-for-profit with more than 2,300 member companies and organizations. Since its inception in 2002,
CaGBC has played a vital role in providing a leadership forum and a unique, integrating force for the building
industry. CaGBCs programs have three distinguishing characteristics:
Committee-based
The heart of this effective coalition is our committee structure, in which volunteer members work with
staff and expert consultants to design and implement strategies. Our committees provide a forum for
members to resolve differences, build alliances, and forge cooperative solutions for influencing change
in all sectors of the building industry.
Member-Driven
Membership is open and balanced and provides a comprehensive platform for carrying out important
programs and activities. We target the issues identified by our members as the highest priority. We
conduct an annual review of achievements that allows us to set policy, revise strategies, and devise work
plans based on members needs.
Consensus-Focused
We work together to promote green buildings and, in doing so, we help to foster greater economic
vitality and environmental health at lower costs. We work to bridge ideological gaps between industry
segments to develop balanced policies and programs that benefit the entire industry.
For more information:

Contact the Canada Green Building Council
47 Clarence St., Suite 202
Ottawa, Ontario K1N 9K1
phone: 1-866-941-1184
fax: 1-613-241-4782
info@cagbc.org
www.cagbc.org
April 1, 2012
Page 2 of 29
COPYRIGHT
Copyright 2012 by the Canada Green Building Council. All rights reserved.
DISCLAIMER AND NOTICES

The Canada Green Building Council authorizes you to view the LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for
District Energy Systems for your individual use and to copy as it is, or in part if you reference the original
document. No content may be altered. In exchange for this authorization, you agree to honour all copyright
and other proprietary notices contained in the original LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for District
Energy Systems. You also agree not to sell or modify the LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for District
Energy Systems or to reproduce, display or distribute the LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for District
Energy Systems in any way for any public or commercial purpose, including display on a Web site or in a
networked environment. Unauthorized use of the LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for District Energy
Systems violates copyright, trademark and other laws and is prohibited. All text, graphics, layout and other
elements of content contained in the LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems is
owned by the Canada Green Building Council and is protected by copyright under Canada, United States
and foreign laws.
Also please note that none of the parties involved in the funding or creation of the LEED Canada 2009
Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems, including the Canada and U.S. Green Building Council or their
members, make any warranty (express or implied) or assume any liability or responsibility to you or any third
parties for the accuracy, completeness or use of, or reliance on, any information contained in the LEED
Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems, or for any injuries, losses or damages (including,
without limitation, equitable relief) arising out of such use or reliance.
As a condition of use, you covenant not to sue, and agree to waive and release the Canada Green Building
Council and its members from any and all claims, demands and causes of action for any injuries, losses or
damages (including, without limitation, equitable relief) that you may now or hereafter have a right to assert
against such parties as a result of your use of, or reliance on, the LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for
District Energy Systems.
TRADEMARK
LEED is a registered trademark of the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), licensed to the Canada Green
Building Council (CaGBC) for use with LEED Canada.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The CaGBC would like to acknowledge the efforts of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) District Energy
System Task Force (DESTF) for their dedication, time and commitment to the publication of this
Interpretation Guide:
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
ORGANIZATION
Jack Meredith (Chair)

Jim Clark
Curt Hepting
Innes Hood
Steve Kemp
Martin Roy
Jennifer Sanguinetti
Gordon Shymko
HGBC Healthy Green Building Consulting

Natural Resources Canada, Office of Energy Efficiency
EnerSys Analytics Inc.
Stantec
Enermodal Engineering Ltd.
Martin Roy & Associs Groupe Conseil Inc.
BC Housing
G.F. Shymko & Associates Inc.
The CaGBC also acknowledges the review process conducted by the Energy and Engineering Technical
Advisory Group and the LEED Canada Steering Committee.
April 1, 2012
Page 3 of 29
CONTENTS
1
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................5
1.2 Administrative ...............................................................................................................................................................6
1.3 Summary of Major Differences from the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide for District Energy
Systems (March 2008) ...................................................................................................................................................7
DISTRICT OR CAMPUS THERMAL ENERGY GUIDANCE ............................................................................................... 8

2.1 Overview .........................................................................................................................................................................8
2.2 Terminology ...................................................................................................................................................................8
2.3 Summary of Submittal Requirements.......................................................................................................................9
2.4 Commissioning (EAp1 and EAc3)............................................................................................................................ 11
2.4.1 EA Prerequisite 1: Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems ......................................... 11
2.4.2 EA Credit 3: Enhanced Commissioning ..................................................................................................................... 11
2.5 Energy Performance (EAp2 & EAc1) ....................................................................................................................... 12
2.5.1 Energy Model Implementation - Method 1 - Building Stand-alone Scenario............................................ 13
2.5.1.1 Energy Rates for Method 1 - Building Stand-alone Scenario ................................................................... 14
2.5.1.2 Modifications to ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Appendix G......................................................................................... 14
2.5.2 Energy Model Implementation - Method 2 - Aggregate Building / DES Scenario................................... 15
2.5.2.1 Energy Rates for Method 2 -Aggregate Building / DES Scenario ........................................................... 15
2.5.2.2 Baseline Building Plant............................................................................................................................................ 15
2.5.2.3 Proposed Building Plant ......................................................................................................................................... 16
2.5.2.3.1 Default DES Efficiencies and Losses .......................................................................................................... 17
2.5.2.4 Energy Simulation vs. Post-Processing ............................................................................................................. 17
2.5.2.5 Combined Heat & Power, Other Atypical Systems ...................................................................................... 17
2.5.2.6 Non-traditional fuels (NTF) .................................................................................................................................... 17
2.5.3 Example Calculation for EAp2 and EAc1 .................................................................................................................. 18
2.6 On-Site Renewable Energy (EAc2) .......................................................................................................................... 20
2.7 Refrigerant Management (EAp3 and EAc4) .......................................................................................................... 21
2.7.1 EA Prerequisite 3, Fundamental Refrigerant Management .............................................................................. 21
2.7.2 EA Credit 4, Enhanced Refrigerant Management ................................................................................................. 21
2.8 Measurement & Verification (EAc5) ........................................................................................................................ 21
2.9 Green Power (EAc6) ................................................................................................................................................... 22
APPENDIX A: Application to LEED Canada-CI, and LEED Canada CS ..................................................................... 23
APPENDIX B: CHP Modelling Guidance for EAp2/EAc1 Method 2 ......................................................................... 24
APPENDIX C: Special Situations for DES Energy Models .......................................................................................... 28
April 1, 2012
Page 4 of 29
INTRODUCTION
This document, published April 1, 2012, supplements the LEED Canada Reference Guide for Green Building
Design and Construction 2009 and describes the treatment of district and campus energy in LEED Canada for
New Construction and Major Renovations 2009 and LEED Canada for Core and Shell Development 2009. This is
the second major release of this document; the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems
was released in March 2008 for LEED Canada for New Construction and Major Renovations version 1.0. This
document applies to buildings using thermal energy produced from or delivered to a source outside the
LEED project building. The main document focuses on LEED Canada for New Construction and Major
Renovations prerequisites and credits; please see Appendix A for additional guidance for LEED Canada for
Core & Shell and LEED Canada for Commercial Interiors.
This version of the LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems may also be applied to
Energy & Atmosphere Prerequisite 2 and Credit 1 for LEED Canada-NC 1.0 and LEED Canada-CS 1.0 projects.
The March 2008 version of the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems must be followed
for all other prerequisites and credits.
1.1 Executive Summary

The following briefly summarizes the requirements of this document for the relevant prerequisite and
credits:
Commissioning (EAp1 and EAc3):
EA Prerequisite 1 (Fundamental Commissioning): An ongoing program of performance monitoring and

maintenance for all upstream equipment (see definition below) is required for district energy systems
where the project owner has direct control or ownership.
EA Credit 3 (Enhanced Commissioning): Commissioning of the district energy systems serving the
building is required for larger buildings where the thermal energy supplied to the building exceeds
a given percentage, or when the percentage of energy provided by the district plant to the building
exceeds a given threshold. Guidance is provided to identify whether a New Commissioning or Retrocommissioning approach should be used.
Energy Performance (EAp2 and EAc1):

EA Prerequisite 2 (Minimum Energy Performance) and EA Credit 1 (Optimize Energy Performance): LEED
Canada NC/CS 2009 projects may choose either the prescriptive path or the performance (energy
simulation) path.
For the prescriptive path, compliance is demonstrated by meeting all prescriptive requirements for the
building and any relevant off-site equipment, as required by the applicable reference standard. The
prescriptive path is not available to LEED Canada-NC/CS 1.0 projects.
For the performance (energy simulation) path, compliance with both EAp2 and EAc1 is demonstrated
via energy modelling using one of the following two options:
April 1, 2012
Method 1 (streamlined path) model district or campus thermal energy as purchased

energy for both the baseline and proposed case energy models, with no direct accounting
of the district or campus networks efficiency. This method is simpler but restricts the
maximum number of points that can be earned. In some situations the guidance requires a
change to the ASHRAE 90.1 baseline system type to accommodate the use of purchased
energy in the baseline case (the MNECB path requires no alteration to the reference system
type).
Method 2 (full accounting) directly account for the efficiency of the district or campus
energy source in the proposed case energy model and compare it to the MNECB or ASHRAE
90.1 baseline case, whichever is applicable. This method is more complex, but the maximum
number of points that can be earned is higher than through Method 1.
Page 5 of 29
NOTE: project teams using the performance (energy simulation) path may choose either one of the above
Methods to show compliance with EAp2 and EAc1.
Renewable Energy / Green Power (EAc2 / EAc6)
Renewable energy generated at the district or campus plant and green power purchased for the district or
campus plant may be applied towards individual LEED buildings served by the plant if the performance path
Method 2 is used for documenting EAp2 and EAc1.
EAc2 (Renewable Energy): The renewable energy contribution to the building is determined based on
the renewable energy contribution to the district or campus plant and the percentage of building
energy cost associated with the plant.
EAc6 (Green Power): The green power contribution to the building is determined based on the
Green Power contribution to the district or campus plant and the percentage of building electricity
consumption associated with the district or campus plant.
Refrigerant Management (EAp3 and EAc4)
EAp3 (Fundamental Refrigerant Management): All applicable downstream & upstream equipment (see
definitions below) must meet the prerequisite requirements.
EAc4 (Enhanced Refrigerant Management): All applicable downstream & upstream equipment (see
definitions below) must meet the credit requirements.
Monitoring and Verification (EAc5)

To achieve this credit, monitoring and verification must be provided for the district or campus energy
systems for buildings exceeding a certain floor area where credit is being pursued under EAc1 for energy
efficiency, or where the building consumes a large percentage of the energy provided by the district energy
system.
1.2 Administrative
This document is an updated and improved version of the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide for District
Energy Systems published in March 2008.
For EAp2 and EAc1, LEED Canada-NC 1.0 and LEED Canada-CS 1.0 projects have the option of using the LEED
Canada Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems published in March 2008 or this updated version for
modelling district energy systems (DESs). The submitted LEED review documentation must indicate which
version of the guidance is being followed. The March 2008 version of the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide
for District Energy Systems must be followed for all other prerequisites and credits.
LEED Canada NC 2009 and LEED Canada CS 2009 projects registered after the release of this document are
required to use this guidance. LEED Canada NC/CS 2009 projects registered prior to April 1, 2012, can use
either version of the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide for District Energy Systems (March 2008 or this version),
in its entirety.
April 1, 2012
Page 6 of 29
1.3 Summary of Major Differences from the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide for
District Energy Systems (March 2008)
General
1) The guidance applies to LEED Canada NC/CS 2009 projects and can be used by LEED Canada NC/CS
1.0 projects for EAp2 and EAc1 in lieu of the LEED Canada Interpretation Guide for District Energy
Systems (March 2008). The vast majority of the guidance is the same for both versions; any
differences are defined when necessary.
2) Definitions, terminology, and document structure have been clarified
3) Inclusion of guidance for additional types of project circumstances
4) Better document organization information used less commonly appears in appendices
5) Guidance for non-traditional fuels (NTF) is covered in a separate document, Guidance for NonTraditional Fuels in LEED Canada.
Enhanced Commissioning (EAc3)
1) Requirements have now been included for all DESs, regardless of control or ownership.
2) Clarification has been provided regarding system commissioning for district plants that include
additions plus existing equipment.
3) Requirements have been provided to align more closely with LEED Canada EB:O&M commissioning
requirements.
Energy Performance (EAp2 / EAc1) Performance (energy simulation) Paths
1) There are two options called Method 1 and Method 2 in this new guidance. Now each project
team chooses one of the two Methods to show compliance with EAp2 and to determine points
under EAc1; the relatively simple Method 1 or the more rigorous calculations that are required to
pursue Method 2. The introduction of Method 1 and the option of demonstrating compliance to
EAp2 through Method 2 are important changes, and are intended to offer LEED users more flexibility
and simplicity.
2) Method 1 district thermal energy utility rates are calculated based on virtual electric and fuel rates
from the energy model paired with default weightings.
3) Clarification is provided regarding the utility rates to be used for Method 2.
4) Clarification is provided for the determination of average efficiency.
5) A table has been added for clarity regarding Method 1 Baseline System types for the ASHRAE 90.1
Appendix G approach.
6) The Combined Heat and Power (CHP) guidance for district energy systems is updated in this
document. The CHP guidance has been modified to provide defaults when efficiency values are not
available, and to clarify how the energy generated from the CHP plant is distributed between
projects.
Renewable Energy / Green Power (EAc2 / EAc6)
1) Calculations of the percentage of renewable energy or green power applied to the building have
been clarified.
Enhanced Refrigerant Management (EAc4)
1) Requirements have now been included.
Measurement & Verification (EAc5)
1) Requirements have now been included.
April 1, 2012
Page 7 of 29
DISTRICT OR CAMPUS THERMAL ENERGY GUIDANCE
2.1 Overview
A typical commercial building has its own energy conversion plants (i.e., chillers, boilers, furnaces, etc.) that
serve only the heating and cooling energy needs of the building itself. Some buildings, however, are
connected to a district or campus energy system where the energy is produced for and/or distributed to
multiple buildings. These district or campus systems can vary widely in size, scope, and complexity, ranging
from two small buildings sharing a common chiller to entire city-wide central distribution networks serving
hundreds of buildings. Generally such systems are designed for high levels of energy efficiency or to use less
environmentally damaging energy sources, but some systems may be old and have poor part-load
performance, high parasitic energy consumption, or thermal losses in energy conversion or transport. From
the global environmental perspective it does not matter whether the building heating or cooling is
generated within the building itself or in an energy plant and delivered by a thermal distribution system a
green building should properly account for the performance of a district or campus system if it is connected
to one.
The intent of this document is to clarify whether, and to what degree, project teams must account for a
district or campus energy system in the scope of the prerequisites and credits in LEED Canada programs
oriented toward design and construction of buildings. This document defines requirements that apply to all
such district or campus energy systems, whether new or pre-existing, and whether owned by the project
buildings owner or another entity. This document does not change the usage of prerequisites or credits all
prerequisites are still required, and all credits are still optional.
2.2 Terminology
District (or Campus) Energy System (DES) a central energy conversion plant and transmission and/or
distribution system that provides thermal energy (heating via hot water or steam, and/or cooling via chilled
water) to more than one building, and where some part of the system (whether the energy conversion, or the
transmission and distribution) extends beyond the boundaries of the LEED project site. Examples include a
20,000-ton central cooling plant and network on a university campus serving dozens of buildings or a single
500-ton chiller located within one building that also serves a second, separate building. This definition includes
only thermal energy systems; central energy supply systems that provide only electricity are excluded from this
definition. Combined heat and power (cogeneration) plants that provide thermal energy are included.
Exception: When several buildings are grouped as part of a single LEED project, including a central plant
building, the central plant is defined as a DES only if it currently serves or is expected to serve other buildings
not within the LEED project boundaries for the project.
Hereafter in this document, for simplicity the abbreviation DES is used to refer to all scenarios in which
thermal energy is transported across the LEED project boundary, whether as part of a city-wide system, a
campus network, or just two neighbouring buildings.
Upstream equipment all heating or cooling systems, equipment, and controls associated with the DES, but
not part of the LEED project buildings thermal connection or interface with the DES. This includes the thermal
energy conversion plant and all the transmission and distribution equipment associated with transporting the
thermal energy to the project building and/or site.
Downstream equipment all heating or cooling systems, equipment, and controls located within the LEED
project building and/or on the project site associated with transporting the thermal energy of the DES into
heated or cooled spaces. This includes the thermal connection or interface with the DES, secondary distribution
systems in the building, and terminal units.
April 1, 2012
Page 8 of 29
Exception: When the building housing the thermal energy plant is itself seeking LEED certification, then the
project shall treat the DES equipment as downstream equipment for the following prerequisites and credits:
EA prerequisite 1
EA prerequisite 2
o Mandatory Measures: The district energy equipment shall comply with all mandatory
measures from ASHRAE 90.1-1999 or MNECB 1997 for LEED Canada-NC/CS 1.0 projects, and
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 or MNECB 1997 for LEED Canada NC/CS 2009 projects.
o Prescriptive Paths: The district energy equipment shall comply with any applicable
prescriptive requirements.
o Performance (energy simulation) Paths: The district energy equipment shall be modelled as
upstream equipment, NOT downstream equipment. It is recommended that such projects
use energy modelling Method 2 (described below).
EA prerequisite 3
EA credit 3
EA credit 4
EA credit 5
Building Stand-Alone Scenario the building is treated separately from the DES; all upstream equipment is
ignored. Generally this approach is simpler to execute but fails to fully account for upstream equipment
efficiency.
Aggregate Building / DES Scenario the building and relevant upstream DES equipment are treated
together as a single, integrated energy system. Generally this approach is more complicated to execute but
more accurately accounts for upstream equipment efficiency.
Virtual energy rate the virtual energy rate of a given fuel is determined by dividing the annual avoidable
energy cost for that fuel by the annual energy consumption for the fuel. This is sometimes also referred to as
a blended rate. Consistent with stand-alone buildings, fixed utility costs should not be included in the
calculation. Rationale for virtual energy rate can be found in section 2.5.
Virtual DES rate is arrived at by applying efficiency factors to the Virtual Energy Rate to produce the price
per unit of energy supplied by a DES used for LEED modelling purposes in Method 1 (details described
below). This rate is calculated using a procedure prescribed in this document and will likely differ from the
purchased energy rate actually paid to the DES supplier.
2.3 Summary of Submittal Requirements

Projects with district energy systems must provide additional submittal documentation in addition to what is
outlined in the applicable LEED Canada reference guide. Project teams should incorporate guidance in this
document into the submittals normally required for each prerequisite and credit. Specifically, submittal
narratives should include the following information:
General description of the DES configuration, including major equipment distribution systems.
EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning
Declaration as to whether or not the project owner has direct control or ownership of the DES.
If the project owner has direct control or ownership of the DES, describe the on-going program
of performance monitoring and maintenance for all upstream equipment and provide
representative evidence. For example, program manuals, maintenance protocols, etc.
EAc3: Best Practice or Enhanced Commissioning
April 1, 2012
Description of upstream systems to be included/excluded in the credit scope, supported by a

rationale. Include a list of any new equipment additions to an existing plant along with any
controls or plant distribution equipment that have changed as a result of the additions.
Provide documentation as per the specific guidance for the new or pre-existing DES.
Page 9 of 29
EAp2/c1: Energy Performance

Prescriptive Paths:
o
Description of upstream systems to be included/excluded in the credit scope with reference to

the applicable LEED Canada Rating System.
Performance Path Method 1 (streamlined path) the building stand-alone scenario:

o
Virtual DES rate calculation.
Description of Baseline Systems as per Table 3 for the ASHRAE compliance path.
EAc1 point calculation.
Performance Path Method 2 (full accounting) the aggregate building/DES scenario:
Energy rates utilized and rationale.
General description of how the Proposed plant was modelled (e.g., workarounds, custom
functions, post-processing, etc.).
All relevant plant efficiency parameters with descriptions (e.g., spreadsheets, software
analyses) or manual calculations showing how these parameters were derived.
All relevant distribution energy and losses with descriptions (e.g., spreadsheets, software
analyses) or manual calculations showing how they were derived.
All relevant methodologies and calculations associated with any Non-Traditional Fuels (NTFs)
used.
EAc1 point calculation. If the project pursues EAc1 points higher than the points cap (see Table
1), documentation as per Performance Path Method 1 (above) is required to establish the EAc1
points maximum.
EAc2: Renewable Energy

o
Detailed description of the renewable energy systems.
All relevant analyses and/or calculations as per the specific guidance in this document.
EAp3: Fundamental Refrigerant Management

o
EAc4: Enhanced Refrigerant Management

o
Description of how all upstream and downstream DES systems comply with this prerequisite,
including any relevant calculations.
Description of how all upstream and downstream DES systems comply with this credit,
including any relevant calculations.
EAc5: Measurement & Verification

o
Description of upstream systems to be included/excluded in the credit scope and rationale.
References to M&V Plan addressing upstream DES systems.
EAc6: Green Power
April 1, 2012
Documentation from the owner attesting to green energy contributions from the DES applied
to the project.
Calculations indicating renewable contributions from the DES, supported by a rationale.
Page 10 of 29
2.4 Commissioning (EAp1 and EAc3)

2.4.1 EA Prerequisite 1: Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems
All downstream equipment is included in the scope of EAp1. Such equipment includes heat exchangers,
steam pressure reduction stations, pumps, valves, pipes, building electrical services, and controls.
If the project owner has direct control or ownership of the DES, then the DES must have in place an ongoing
program of performance monitoring and maintenance for all upstream equipment. If the project owner does
not have direct control or ownership of the DES, then all upstream equipment is excluded from the scope of
EAp1.
Refer to section 2.3 for submittal requirements.
2.4.2 EA Credit 3: Enhanced Commissioning
All downstream equipment is included in the scope of EAc3. Such equipment includes heat exchangers,
All upstream equipment associated with serving the project building is included in the scope of EAc3 if all the
following conditions are true for the project building; otherwise upstream equipment is excluded from the
scope of EAc3:
the project buildings gross floor area is greater than 4,650 square metres (50,000 square feet)
AND
the DES supplies energy constituting more than 20% of the project buildings annual energy cost, as
determined from the Proposed Case energy modelling run of either the EAc1 Method 1 or Method 2
scenario (whichever option the team uses). Projects that use no energy model (prescriptive path)
shall assume the DES supplies at least 20%.
AND EITHER
the project building is pursuing points under EAc1 using the performance path (energy
simulation)
OR
The project buildings peak connected load is 50% or more of the DES total connected load or
expected connected load at the date of the project buildings substantial completion.
All upstream DES equipment associated with serving the project building subject to EAc3 requirements may
show compliance with EAc3 using the following approaches:
1) If the DES is new, being substantially upgraded, has new additions, or conditions are otherwise
suitable show that commissioning or recommissioning of all relevant DES equipment has taken
place within the past three years of the date of the project buildings substantial completion (see
specific requirements under Interpretations below), or
2) If the DES is pre-existing and in ongoing operation show that preventive maintenance, corrective
maintenance, and efficiency monitoring programs have been in place for all relevant DES
equipment that ensure ongoing DES energy efficiency performance meets or exceeds the DES
design intent. Show that DES energy efficiency performance has been tested, recorded, and
improved as needed under those programs within the past three years of the project buildings
substantial completion. Any reasonable efficiency metric may be used for this purpose, such as
overall system COP, kW/ton, etc.
Refer to section 2.3 for additional submittal requirements.
April 1, 2012
Page 11 of 29
Interpretations:
Commissioning of upstream equipment applies to the entire DES serving the building, including both
the central plant and the transmission and distribution systems.
Commissioning applies only to the DES services the project building is using. For example, if the
building is using only the heating services of a district heating and cooling plant, then only the heating
systems of the DES must be included in the scope of EAc3.
If approach 1 above (commissioning) is followed, use the following guidance to define the specific
commissioning requirements: A DES that is three years old or less at the date of the project buildings
substantial completion is considered new construction and is to be commissioned in accordance with
the requirements of EAc3 for the relevant LEED Canada rating system for the project. Similarly, any new
equipment additions to an existing plant along with any controls or plant distribution equipment that
have changed as a result of the additions shall be commissioned in accordance with the requirements of
EAc3 for the relevant LEED Canada rating system for the project.
A DES greater than three years old and with no substantial new equipment additions is considered to be
existing and is to be commissioned in accordance with the requirements of LEED Canada for Existing
Buildings: Operations & Maintenance 2009 EA Credit 2.2 or 2.3.
2.5 Energy Performance (EAp2 and EAc1)

All downstream equipment is always included in the scope of EAp2 and EAc1. Such equipment includes heat
exchangers, steam pressure reduction stations, pumps, valves, pipes, building electrical services, and
controls. Upstream equipment may be included or excluded depending on the compliance path the project
team uses.
Both EAp2 and EAc1 offer prescriptive and performance compliance paths, and for DES projects compliance
is shown for both EAp2 and EAc1 using similar techniques.
Prescriptive Paths project teams using any prescriptive path to document compliance with EAp2 and to
document points under EAc1 shall include or exclude effects of upstream DES equipment as specified in the
applicable reference standard listed in the applicable LEED Canada rating system. If the reference standard
does not specify either approach, the upstream effects shall be excluded. The prescriptive path is not
available to LEED Canada-NC/CS 1.0 projects.
Performance (energy simulation) Paths project teams may choose either Method 1 or Method 2 to
demonstrate compliance for EAp2 and to determine points earned under EAc1:
Method 1 (streamlined path) Building Stand-alone Scenario
Method 2 (full accounting) Aggregate Building / DES Scenario

NOTE: under this updated DES interpretation guide, no project team is required to assess Method 2. Also,
projects may choose to demonstrate compliance for EAp2 through Method 2 Aggregate Building / DES
Scenario (i.e., projects are not required to demonstrate EAp2 compliance based on the stand-alone
building).
April 1, 2012
Page 12 of 29
The points available under the Performance (energy simulation) paths have restrictions in each Method as
shown in Table 1:
Table 1: LEED Canada EAc1 points restrictions with DES considerations
Points available
in Rating System
DES Method 1
points cap*
DES Method 2
points cap**
3 or double
Method 1 points,
whichever is
higher
2 or double
Method 1 points,
whichever is
higher
LEED Canada v1.x

LEED Canada-NC
LEED Canada-CS
10
10
LEED Canada-CI
N/A (see Appendix A)
LEED Canada v2009

LEED Canada NC
LEED Canada CS***
19
21
10
6 or double
Method 1 points,
whichever is
higher
12
8 or double
Method 1 points,
whichever is
higher
points cap for Method 1 means this is the maximum number of points that can be earned in this
scenario; projects seeking more points must use Method 2.
** points cap for Method 2 means this is the maximum number of points that can be earned in this
scenario; the points cap listed, or twice the number of points achieved through Method 1.
*** The points caps for LEED Canada CS 2009 are higher than LEED Canada NC 2009 due to EAc1 having
a 3-point minimum for all projects in the LEED Canada CS 2009 rating system. The points caps in this
table reflect that 3-point minimum.
For both Method 1 and Method 2, follow the modelling guidelines and requirements for the MNECB or
ASHRAE path, whichever is applicable, except as noted below under Sections 2.5.1 and 2.5.2.
Refer to section 2.3 for submittal requirements for each path.
2.5.1 Energy Model Implementation - Method 1 - Building Stand-alone Scenario
In Method 1, the energy model scope accounts for only downstream equipment. Energy provided by the
DES is modelled as purchased energy for both the MNECB and ASHRAE paths as per Table 2 in order to hold
the DES cost neutral in the model. The project must comply with the minimum performance requirements of
EAp2, and points available under EAc1 are capped as per Table 1.
Table 2: Energy Source for Method 1
District heating
District cooling
Baseline
Purchased heat
Purchased chilled water
Proposed
Purchased heat
Purchased chilled water
April 1, 2012
Page 13 of 29
2.5.1.1 Energy Rates for Method 1 - Building Stand-alone Scenario

Energy rates for all non-DES-supplied energy are as per normal LEED modelling rules, using the local
utility rate schedules as they would normally be applied to the building.
DES-supplied energy is not modelled using the actual purchased energy rates paid to the DES supplier.
Instead, separate virtual DES rates are calculated for each type of energy supplied by the DES (e.g.,
chilled water, hot water, or steam) based on the virtual energy rates for each energy source as per the
following methodology (using typical DES efficiencies).
Virtual DES Rate Methodology:

If the utility rate structure for an energy source is flat (i.e., the cost per unit energy is the same
throughout the year and does not vary due to demand charges, amount of energy used, or seasons)
then simply use the utility flat rate in the Virtual DES Rate Formulae below to calculate the virtual DES
rate.
If the utility rate structure is not flat, then a preliminary modelling run of the Method 1 Baseline energy
model must be completed to determine the virtual energy rate for the energy source (i.e., divide total $
by total amount of energy, for each energy type). For this preliminary run only, the rate for the DESsupplied energy may be left blank or may be entered as any value, since it should not affect the outcome
of the virtual rate calculation. This virtual energy rate is then used in the Virtual DES Rate Formulae
below to calculate the virtual DES rate.
A preliminary modelling run to determine a virtual rate for fossil fuels will not be possible if the building
does not use fossil fuels (i.e., all heating is provided by the DES). In this case, use a flat virtual rate
consistent with either the rates the DES is charged or a virtual flat rate representative of what would
normally apply to the building (for example: market gas rates).
Virtual DES Rate Formulae:

District Chilled Water Rate:
Units of $/MMBtu = Virtual Electric Rate (in $/kWh) x 71
Units of $/ton-hour = Virtual Electric Rate (in $/kWh) x 0.85
(where MMBtu = 1 million Btu)
District Hot Water Rate = Virtual Fuel Rate x 1.6

District Steam Rate = Virtual Fuel Rate x 1.8
2.5.1.2 Modifications to ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Appendix G
For the ASHRAE 90.1-2007 compliance path, OPTION 1, PATH 2 under LEED Canada NC/CS 2009, the
Baseline HVAC systems shall be modelled in accordance with Appendix G requirements, with
modifications to Tables G3.1.A and G3.1.B as per Table 3 below. Any system parameters not specifically
referenced in Table 3 are modelled as specified in Appendix G. The changes in Table 3 only apply to
building systems and/or equipment serviced by the DES. All other systems and/or equipment shall be
modelled in accordance with Appendix G requirements.
April 1, 2012
Page 14 of 29
Table 3: Method 1 Baseline System Type Revisions From ASHRAE Appendix G Instructions
ASHRAE App G
Baseline
System Type
Changes from App G Baseline
System 1
System 2
System 3
System 4
District Energy System Used in Proposed Design:

District Cooling
Only
4-pipe Fan Coil w/
HW Boiler Heat
4-pipe Fan Coil w/
HW Boiler Heat
2-pipe CV AHU w/
Fossil Fuel Furnace
2-pipe CV AHU w/
Fossil Fuel Furnace
System 5
Change to System 7
System 6
Change to System 8
System 7
No Change
System 8
No Change
District Heating
Only
District Heating &

Cooling
No Change*
4-pipe Fan Coil
PSZ-AC w/district
heating
4-pipe CV AHU
No Change
Change to System 7
No Change
No Change
For spaces that are served by district chilled water, and meet exceptions (b) or (c) to G3.1.1,
the changes to System types 3 and 4 shall be as shown in Table 3 above.
2.5.2 Energy Model Implementation - Method 2 - Aggregate Building / DES Scenario

In Method 2, the energy model scope accounts for both downstream equipment and upstream equipment.
The DES energy source is not modelled as cost-neutral purchased energy; rather, the Proposed case uses a
virtual DES-equivalent plant and the Baseline uses an on-site plant meeting the default efficiencies described
in this document.
2.5.2.1 Energy Rates for Method 2 -Aggregate Building / DES Scenario
Energy rates for both the Proposed and Baseline buildings are local rates as they would normally apply
to the building for the energy sources under consideration. For energy sources used by the DES but not
normally available to the building (e.g., diesel), use the rates charged to the DES. If this information is not
available, use representative market rates.
Exception: For DES plants that operate under specific and atypical rate structures and actively take
advantage of these rates through strategies such as load management, energy storage, etc., use the rate
structures as they apply to the DES for both the Proposed and Baseline.
2.5.2.2 Baseline Building Plant
Model the Baseline building plant with conventional equipment using performance parameters and
efficiencies as per the modelling rules and/or requirements of MNECB or ASHRAE 90.1 (ECB for ASHRAE
90.1-1999, Appendix G for ASHRAE 90.1-2007), using energy sources corresponding to the DES.
April 1, 2012
Page 15 of 29
2.5.2.3 Proposed Building Plant

Model a virtual plant with the same efficiencies as the entire upstream DES heating, cooling and/or CHP
system, including all distribution losses and/or energy use. Efficiencies and losses are to be determined
using the methods described below, and may be determined and modelled at any level of time resolution
ranging from hourly to annual. However, the time resolution must be sufficiently granular to capture and
reasonably represent any significant time and/or load-dependent interactions between systems (e.g.,
thermal storage, CHP).
The following methods, in order of preference, are acceptable for determining equipment efficiencies,
distribution losses, and distribution energy:
Monitored data
Engineering analysis
Default values
Monitoring and analytical methods may be combined as necessary and appropriate. The following
specific requirements apply:
Heating Plants:
Efficiencies, whether determined through monitoring or analytically, must include all operational
effects such as standby, equipment cycling, part load operation, internal pumping and thermal
losses.
Cooling Plants:
Efficiencies, whether determined through monitoring or analytically, must include all operational
effects such as standby, equipment cycling, part load operation, internal pumping and thermal
losses.
Thermal Distribution Losses:
Monitored Data: The distribution losses for the DES can be determined by measuring the total
thermal energy leaving the DES plant and comparing it to the summation of the thermal energy
that is used by the buildings connected to the DES, to get a percentage of total distribution losses
relative to total loads of the DES. This percentage is incorporated in the energy model by derating
the plant efficiency accordingly (i.e., plant efficiency (%) x [100% - distribution loss (%)]).
Engineering Analysis: The distribution losses for the DES can be determined through engineering
analysis that takes into consideration all distribution losses between the DES and the building (i.e.,
distribution main losses use a prorated amount based on load; dedicated branch losses use the
total losses of the branch that feeds the building, including heat losses and steam trap losses).
This amount is then compared to the total load of the building, to get a percentage distribution
loss relative to load. This percentage is incorporated in the energy model by downgrading the
plant efficiency accordingly.
Pumping Energy:
Whether through monitored data or engineering analysis, the pumping energy for the project is
determined by prorating the total pump energy of the DES by the ratio of annual thermal load of
the building to the total annual DES thermal load. The pump energy is modelled as auxiliary
electrical load in the Proposed case.
April 1, 2012
Page 16 of 29
2.5.2.3.1 Default DES Efficiencies and Losses

Actual efficiency performance data on the DES serving the project building is preferred. If the project
team cannot obtain or determine the actual performance data, the following default values are to be
used. These values are conservative, intended to represent a DES with relatively low efficiency. A welldesigned and operated DES will generally offer better performance than the defaults listed here. Default
values are as follows:
DES heating plant 70% (Higher Heating Value) for the total boiler plant average efficiency.
DES cooling plant COP of 4.4 for the total cooling plant average efficiency (including cooling
towers and primary pumps).
Thermal distribution losses the following values may be used to account for seasonal thermal
distribution losses including minor leaks and/or condensate losses:
o chilled water district cooling 5%
o hot water district heating 10%
o closed loop steam systems 15%; open loop steam systems 25%
o steam systems that are partially open/closed must prorate between the above 15% and
25% losses in accordance with the fraction of expected or actual condensate loss
Pumping Energy must be determined or estimated where it applies (no default).
NOTE: all the guidance in Section 2.5 assumes that DES-generated heat is used for heat in the connected
building, and DES-generated cooling is used for cooling in the connected building. If the DES produces
heating that is then converted to cooling for the connected building using absorption chillers or other
similar technology then this guidance must be modified. See Appendix C for details.
2.5.2.4 Energy Simulation vs. Post-Processing
Whenever possible, incorporate system and equipment performance parameters directly into the
energy simulation. Potential methods include developing efficiency curves and scheduling equipment
operation and/or curves. Post-processing of DES performance is acceptable if reasonable simulation
methods are not available or are too onerous. All post-processing methodologies must be fully
rationalized and documented.
2.5.2.5 Combined Heat & Power, Other Atypical Systems
Combined heat and power (CHP) captures the heat that would otherwise be rejected in traditional fossil
fuel generation of electrical power so that the total efficiency of these integrated systems is much
greater than from traditional central station power plants. CHP systems typically produce lower
emissions compared to traditional fossil fuel generation. Other benefits include reduction in peak
demand, releasing of electrical system capacity, and reduction in overall electrical system transmission
and distribution losses. See Appendix B for further guidance.
DESs also often incorporate unconventional features such as thermal storage, ground or surface water
cooling, waste heat recovery, and cascaded energy systems such as steam generation combined with
absorption cooling. These features should be incorporated into the Proposed virtual plant to the
greatest extent practical using the general principles presented in this guidance. Appendix C provides
guidance on specific common circumstances. Confirmation of the acceptability of modelling and/or
analytical techniques for unusual DES features can be pursued through the Credit Interpretation Request
(CIR) process.
2.5.2.6 Non-Traditional Fuels (NTF)
EAc1 points can be awarded for the use of Non-Traditional Fuels (NTFs) in both the stand-alone building
as well as the DES. Refer to the Guidance for Non-Traditional Fuels in LEED Canada for calculating the
energy costs and modelling methodology.
April 1, 2012
Page 17 of 29
2.5.3 Example Calculation for EAp2 and EAc1

The following example uses OPTION 1. WHOLE BUILDING ENERGY SIMULATION, PATH 2. ASHRAE 90.1-2007
in LEED Canada NC 2009 for a new facility with relatively low on-site energy savings which is connected to a
DES. The example includes the virtual energy rate calculation as well as how to determine compliance
through Method 1 (streamlined) and Method 2 (full accounting), and the points cap for EAc1.
Baseline ASHRAE 90.1-2007 model:
Electricity requirements:
1,200,000 kWh
Total on-site heating load: 3,500 GJe
(note: on-site heating load represents the

amount of heat that needs to be delivered, not
the energy input required to deliver the heat)
Proposed model connected to a hot water DES:

Electricity requirements:
1,020,000 kWh
Total on-site heating load: 2,905 GJe
(15% savings)
(17% savings in the building without accounting
for the influence of the DES)
Applicable market utility rates:

Applicable electricity rate:
$0.07 per kWh
Market natural gas rate:
$10.00 per GJ
Calculating EAp2 and EAc1 through Method 1 - Building Stand-alone Scenario:

1) Determine the virtual district hot water rate (RHWv) to apply to the on-site heating load:
RHWv = ($10.00/GJ) 1.6 = $16.00/GJe
2) Determine the Baseline building cost and Proposed building cost:
BASELINEM1 = (1,200,000 kWh $0.07/kWh) + (3,500 GJe $16.00/GJe)
BASELINEM1 = $84,000 + $56,000 = $140,000
PROPOSEDM1 = (1,020,000 kWh $0.07/kWh) + (2,905 GJe $16.00/GJe)
PROPOSEDM1 = $71,400 + $46,480= $117,880
3) Determine the percent energy cost savings:
% cost savings = 100 x (BASELINEM1 PROPOSEDM1) / BASELINEM1
% cost savings = 100 x ($140,000 - $117,880) / $140,000 = 15.8%
Energy cost savings of 15.8%; the design meets EAp2 requirements and qualifies for LEED Canada
NC 2009 following OPTION 1, PATH 2. ASHRAE 90.1-2007, through Method 1.
Note: for LEED Canada-NC 1.0 projects, EAp2 compliance must be demonstrated on the basis of energy
consumption savings (i.e., this calculation is not required to determine EAp2 compliance for LEED
Canada-NC 1.0 projects.).
4) Determine the minimum number of applicable EAc1 points:
Using Method 1, energy cost savings of 15.8% is equivalent to 2 EAc1 points for new buildings
through OPTION 1, PATH 2. ASHRAE 90.1-2007.
April 1, 2012
Page 18 of 29
Calculating EAp2 and EAc1 through Method 2 - Aggregate Building / DES Scenario:
If credit for DES is being pursued, the energy analysis must incorporate in the effects of the DES on the
delivery of heat to the building.
5) The Baseline building cost must be determined following ASHRAE 90.1-2007 stipulations. Simulate
the Baseline for the heating system in the building as per Section 2.5.2.2, using the applicable
market rates. For the purposes of this example, assume the overall heating plant efficiency for the
Baseline plant was determined to be 70%, in which case the following would be representative of
the simulated annual Baseline building cost:
BASELINEM2 = (1,200,000 kWh $0.07/kWh) + (3,500 GJe 70% $10.00/GJe)
BASELINEM2 = $84,000 + $ 50,000 = $134,000
6) Calculate the Proposed building cost using simulation or representative post-processed calculations
(i.e., improved building efficiency and measured and/or calculated DES efficiency). For illustrative
purposes, the following two scenarios for the overall DES efficiency are shown:
Scenario A: DES efficiency is determined to be 60%, or 14% less efficient than the 70% from
the BASELINEM2 (i.e., [70%-60%]/70% = 14%) for this example.
i)
Calculate the equivalent upstream PROPOSEDM2,A with the DES, and determine the percentage
cost savings:
PROPOSEDM2,A = (1,020,000 kWh $0.07/kWh) + (2,905 GJe 60% $10.00/GJe)
PROPOSEDM2,A = $71,400 + $48,417 = $119,817
% cost savings = 100 x (BASELINEM2 PROPOSEDM2,A) / BASELINEM2
% cost savings = 100 x ($134,000 - $119,817) / $134,000 = 10.6%
ii)
Energy cost savings of 10.6% is lower than the value calculated under Method 1. As
incorporating the effects of the DES (using Method 2) would only act to lower the savings, the
project can earn more EAc1 points through the Method 1 calculation above.
Scenario B: DES efficiency is determined to decrease gas use by 50% compared to the
baseline DES system.
iii) Calculate the equivalent upstream PROPOSEDM2,B with the DES, and determine the percentage
cost savings:
PROPOSEDM2,B = (1,020,000 kWh $0.07/kWh) + (2,905 GJe 70% 50% $10.00/GJe)
PROPOSEDM2,B = $71,400 + $20,750= $92,150
% cost savings = 100 x (BASELINEM2 PROPOSEDM2,B) / BASELINEM2
% cost savings = 100 x ($134,000 - $92,150) / $134,000 = 31.2%
iv) Energy cost savings of 31.2% is higher than the value calculated under Method 1. This is
equivalent to 10 EAc1 points for new buildings using the OPTION 1, PATH 2. ASHRAE 90.12007 performance path. However, per Table 1, the points cap for EAc1 is 6 or double Method 1
points, whichever is higher. Therefore, in this case the project is capped at 6 EAc1 points.
These calculations also demonstrate compliance for EAp2 for this project scenario.
Note: in this example, if Method 1 points were higher than 3 (half of the Points Cap of 6), the available
points would be higher (up to double Method 1 points). For instance, if Method 1 had indicated 4 points,
the adjusted EAc1 points with the DES included (Method 2) would have been double this, and the project
would earn 8 EAc1 points.
April 1, 2012
Page 19 of 29
2.6 On-Site Renewable Energy (EAc2)

Renewable energy sources as defined in EAc2 (e.g., electricity, heat, or chilled water energy produced from
photovoltaics, solar thermal systems, wind turbines, geothermal, low-impact hydro, wave/tidal, untreated
wood waste, agricultural crops or waste, animal and other organic waste, and landfill gas) are the only
renewable sources allowed for credit under EAc2. The use of air; ocean, lake, or river water; or ambient earth
for a thermal heating or cooling sink is categorized as an efficiency strategy in LEED and falls under EAc1. The
proper treatment of renewable energy in LEED Canada certification application calculations is covered in the
applicable LEED Canada Reference Guide. NOTE: The savings from Non-Traditional Fuel (NTF) can NOT be
used as energy cost savings from renewable energy systems in EAc2 (refer to the Guidance for NonTraditional Fuels in LEED Canada).
For projects documenting EAp2/c1 using energy simulation Method 2 (Aggregate Building/DES Scenario),
qualifying renewable energy sources according to the definition above used in a DES may earn points in
EAc2 for a connected building (i.e., they count as on-site renewable energy for the connected building). For
any projects using energy simulation Method 1 for EAp2/c1, renewable DES sources do not earn points in
EAc2 for a connected building.
Performance for EAc2 is based on the fraction of the project buildings annual energy cost that is renewable
energy. The project buildings total annual energy cost shall be derived from the Proposed Case modelling
run of the Method 2 scenario described in the EAc1 section of this document.
The fraction of project energy costs offset by renewable energy contributed by the DES depends on how
much of the buildings load the DES supplies, and how much of the DES energy source is renewable. The
total cost offset is based on the product of these two factors. For each thermal energy source provided to the
building by the District Plant, calculate the renewable contribution as follows:
1) Find the fraction of the annual DES thermal energy source provided by qualifying renewable sources. If
two fuel sources are required to generate the thermal energy source (e.g., electric pumps and natural
gas burners for boilers), the fraction of DES provided by the qualifying renewable source should be
based on amount (e.g., kBtu), and should account for all end-uses used to generate and distribute the
thermal energy source.
2) Find the fraction of the project buildings annual energy consumption that is supplied by the DES
3) Multiply number 1 (above) by number 2 (above) for each energy source provided by qualifying
renewables.
4) Add together the renewable energy contribution from each district thermal energy source serving the
building (3 above), in order to identify the total renewable energy contribution from the district plant.
If renewable energy contributions from the DES are applied to a connected building, a letter must be
provided from the DES owner or operator verifying the following:
the quantity of renewable energy reported in #1 above is allocated to the DES itself (i.e., the upstream
generation and/or distribution equipment) and not directly to any building, and
within the overall DES renewable energy allocation, no renewable energy assigned specifically to the
DES central plant building, if any (in a separate LEED application), is also being counted towards the
renewable energy contribution of the connected project building, and
no renewable energy is being double-counted among any connected project buildings (in separate
LEED applications).
April 1, 2012
Page 20 of 29
For projects without an energy model (prescriptive path), EAc2 credit may not be taken for renewable
energy sources used for the DES upstream of the project. However, credit may be taken for on-site
renewable energy associated with the project building itself. In this situation, project teams follow the
standard guidance provided in the LEED Canada Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction
2009 for documenting renewable energy percentage using the DOE Commercial Building Energy
Consumption Survey (CBECS) data.
For projects with EAc2 eligible on-site renewable energy sources that are separate from the DES, calculate
the amount of energy cost offset by the renewable technologies as outlined in the applicable LEED Canada
reference guide.
2.7 Refrigerant Management (EAp3 and EAc4)

2.7.1 EA Prerequisite 3: Fundamental Refrigerant Management
All applicable downstream AND upstream equipment must meet the prerequisite requirements.
2.7.2 EA Credit 4: Enhanced Refrigerant Management
All applicable downstream AND upstream equipment must meet the credit requirements to earn this credit.
2.8 Measurement & Verification (EAc5)

All downstream equipment is included in the scope of EAc5. Such equipment includes heat exchangers,
All upstream equipment is included in the scope of EAc5 if the following conditions are true for the project
building; otherwise upstream equipment is excluded from the scope of EAc5:
the project buildings gross floor area is greater than 4,650 square metres (50,000 square feet)
AND
the DES supplies energy constituting more than 20% of the project buildings annual energy cost, as
determined from the Proposed Case energy modelling run from EAp2/EAc1 Method 1 or 2. Projects
that use no energy model (prescriptive path) shall assume the DES supplies at least 20%.
AND EITHER
the project building is pursuing any points under EAc1 using the performance path (energy
simulation),
OR
The project buildings peak connected load is 50% or more of the DES total connected load or
expected connected load at the date of the buildings substantial completion.
April 1, 2012
Page 21 of 29
Interpretations
If required according to the criteria above, M&V of upstream DES equipment shall be implemented to
the extent necessary to verify the DES performance claimed under EAc1, and accordingly applies only to
the DES systems that the building is utilizing. For example, if the building is utilizing only the heating
services of a district heating and cooling plant, then only the heating systems of the DES are to be
included in the M&V scope.
This guidance does not necessarily require that any metering be installed on upstream DES equipment
itself according the IPMVP protocol. Rather, the M&V Plan for the project building must include metering
of the site energy delivered to the project building by the DES (generally using a Btu meter), as well as
full accounting of upstream DES whole-system energy performance so that overall (DES+building)
energy efficiency can be derived. Generally this requires some knowledge of input energy consumption
of the DES central plant. Any reasonable efficiency metric may be used to account for overall upstream
system energy performance, such as overall system COP, kW/ton, etc.
2.9 Green Power (EAc6)

For projects documenting EAp2/c1 using energy simulation Method 2 (Aggregate Building / DES Scenario),
green power used in a DES may contribute towards EAc6 for a connected building. For any projects using
energy simulation Method 1 (Building Stand-alone Scenario) for EAp2/c1, green power used in a DES does
not contribute to EAc6 for a connected building.
Performance for EAc6 is based on the fraction of the project buildings annual electric energy consumption
that is supplied by green power. In the DES setting, this fraction depends in turn on the fraction of district
plant electricity that is supplied by green power, and the fraction of the Method 2 models annual electric
consumption associated with the DES. For each thermal energy source provided to the building by the
District Plant, calculate the green power contribution as follows:
1) Find the fraction of the annual DES energy use supplied by qualifying green power sources.
2) Find the fraction of the project buildings annual energy consumption that is supplied by the DES
3) Multiply number 1 (above) by number 2 (above).
The project buildings total annual electric energy consumption reported for EAc6 credit compliance path
OPTION 1 (energy simulation) shall be derived from the Proposed Case modelling run of the EAc1 Method 2
scenario.
If green energy contributions from the DES are applied to the project, a letter must be provided from the
DES owner or operator verifying the following:
that the renewable energy reported (in 1 above) is allocated specifically to the DES generation and/or
distribution equipment, and
no renewable energy allocated specifically to the DES central plant building, if any (in a separate LEED
application), is being counted towards the renewable energy contribution of the satellite project
building, and
no renewable energy is being double-counted among any satellite project buildings (in separate LEED
applications).
For projects that do not follow EAc1 Method 2 (Aggregate Building / DES Scenario), EAc6 credit may not be
taken for renewable energy sources used for the DES upstream of the project. However, credit may be taken
for green power associated with the project itself. In this situation project teams follow the standard
guidance provided in the LEED Canada Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction 2009 for
documenting green power percentage using the DOE Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey
(CBECS) data.
April 1, 2012
Page 22 of 29
APPENDIX A: Application to LEED Canada-CI, and LEED Canada CS
LEED Canada for Commercial Interiors

For projects under the LEED Canada for Commercial Interiors (LEED Canada-CI) rating system, District Energy
Systems have no effect on any EA section prerequisites or credits. Any effects of DES shall be picked up by SS
Credit 1, Site Selection, under one of the following paths:
Option K, On-Site Renewable Energy renewable energy supplied through a DES is treated as on-site
for the purposes of this credit, subject to the restrictions listed under the guidance for EA credit 2 above
Option L, Other Quantifiable Environmental Performance
LEED Canada for Core & Shell

Projects under the LEED Canada for Core and Shell (LEED Canada CS) rating system shall follow the same
guidance for District Energy Systems as provided for LEED Canada NC. Note that the LEED Canada Reference
Guide for Green Building Design and Construction 2009 contains detailed guidance for energy modelling a core
and shell project.
April 1, 2012
Page 23 of 29
APPENDIX B: CHP Modelling Guidance for EAp2/EAc1 Method 2
Generally, LEED projects using the energy modelling path for EAp2 or EAc1 may use either the Method 1
approach (Building Stand-Alone Scenario) or the Method 2 approach (Aggregate Building / DES Scenario).
Under Method 2 some projects will have a CHP plant (cogeneration plant) within the DES. In such scenarios
the fuel inputs, electric generation outputs, and heat recovery shall be modelled as described in this
appendix. Refer to the Guidance for Non-Traditional Fuels in LEED Canada for determining the input energy
costs for CHP plants using non-traditional fuels.
The Baseline case is modelled as described in section 2.4 of this document. Although the baseline case is not
modelled as CHP (i.e., the model assumes separate production of electricity and thermal energy), in some
situations, for CHP energy accounting purposes, the baseline case is charged with extra energy use. The
situations when this applies and the method for making this adjustment are defined below.
The proposed case may be modelled in various ways, each of which is described below.
Calculation Methods
The average electric generation, fuel input, and heat recovery of the CHP shall be determined OR the
defaults for electric and thermal efficiency below shall be used in conjunction with capacity ratings of the
equipment to calculate the average electric generation and fuel input.
The following are acceptable methods of calculating annual electric generation:
Monitor the total annual gross electric generation. Also monitor the total annual parasitic loads (such as
the annual electricity used for cooling the intake air for a turbine). The net annual electric generation
would be calculated as the annual gross electricity generated with all parasitic loads subtracted out.
Model the generators in energy simulation software based on the rules and procedures defined in
ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G: Use peak electric efficiencies, and generator curves that match the
installed generator(s). Apply measured or estimated load profiles as process loads to reflect the
estimated total electric and thermal loads on the district energy CHP system. Use the total energy
generated and total fuel input from this analysis. Any parasitic loads (such as the annual electricity
used for cooling the intake air for a turbine) must be included in the analysis and subtracted from
the annual electric generation to calculate the total annual electric generation.
The following are acceptable methods of calculating annual fuel input:
Monitor the total annual fuel input to the generator(s).
Model the generators in energy simulation software based on the rules and procedures defined in
ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G. Use peak electric efficiencies, and generator curves that match the
installed generator(s).
The following are acceptable methods of calculating waste heat recovery:
Monitor the total waste heat recovered.
Model the generator(s) in energy simulation software based on the rules and procedures defined in
ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G. Use peak electric efficiencies, and generator curves that match the
installed generator(s). Model the thermal equipment served by the CHP waste heat (e.g., boilers,
absorption chillers, etc.) using the installed equipment capacities, efficiencies and efficiency curves,
and reflecting the total heating and cooling loads on the plant as a process load. Use the energy
modelling outputs to identify the total heat recovered.
April 1, 2012
Page 24 of 29
CHP Electric Output

Proposed case: allocate the electricity generation to the building based on the fraction of thermal loads to
the building for the DES sources that use recovered waste heat. For each DES source supplied to the
building, determine the fraction of the recovered waste heat applied to that source as well as the amount
serving the project building. The same calculation approach is taken for all DES systems, but relatively simple
DES systems can use a simplified formula as shown below:
Simple DES/CHP arrangement: for CHP plants in which the recovered waste heat is used directly in the
DES and that heat serves only heating loads in the connected buildings, the electricity generation
assigned to each building is calculated as:
CHP_ELECBLDG = (XHEAT * BLDGHEAT) * CHP_ELECTOTAL
Where:
CHP_ELECBLDG = The CHP electricity generation allocated to the building
XHEAT = The fraction of the CHP plants total production of waste heat applied to the DES directly
BLDGHEAT = The fraction of total district heat provided to the building
CHP_ELECTOTAL = The total CHP electricity generated at the DES plant
General, more complex arrangement: for CHP plants in which a portion of the recovered heat is used to
drive absorption chillers that provide cooling through a DES chilled water loop, and/or a portion of the
recovered heat is used for a third, separate district energy source (e.g., if the building connects to both a
steam loop and a hot water loop, or to two separate chilled water loops). In this case the electricity
generation assigned to each building is calculated as:
CHP_ELECBLDG = [ (XHEAT * BLDGHEAT) + (YCHW * BLDGCHW) + (ZSOURCE * BLDGSOURCE) ] * CHP_ELECTOTAL
Where:
CHP_ELECBLDG = (same as above for simple case)
XHEAT = (same as above for simple case)
BLDGHEAT = (same as above for simple case)
YCHW = The fraction of the CHP plants total production of waste heat applied to producing chilled
water in the DES
BLDGCHW = The fraction of total district chilled water provided to the building
ZSOURCE = The fraction of the CHP plants total production of waste heat applied to the third district
energy source
BLDGSOURCE = The fraction of the third district energy source that is provided to the building
CHP_ELECTOTAL = (same as above for simple case)
Baseline case: follow the general procedures described in section 2.4 of this document, and adjust the results as
follows depending on the results of the DES electricity allocation and the total modelled electricity use of the
building in the Method 2 Proposed Design (including the electricity consumption of district plant equipment
serving the building):
Scenario A the buildings allocation of CHP-generated electricity is less than or equal to its
modelled electricity consumption: No adjustment. The Baseline building is charged with the
energy used by its (non-CHP) systems at market rates using standard procedures.
April 1, 2012
Page 25 of 29
Scenario B the buildings allocation of CHP-generated electricity exceeds its modelled

electricity consumption: the amount of excess CHP electricity allocated to the building is
considered process energy in the energy model. Adjust the input fuel associated with this excess
CHP electricity in the Baseline case as described below. Note: This applies to LEED Canada 2009 only.
For LEED Canada-NC 1.0 and LEED Canada-CS 1.0 projects, the process energy is considered nonregulated and deducted from both the Proposed and Baseline.
CHP Fuel Input

Allocate the CHP input fuel to the project building based on a proration and assignment of the total input
fuel according to the results of the CHP electricity allocation described above. Use the prevailing energy
rates as they apply to the design building. Any additional energy used by the proposed design building is
also charged at market rates. Use the following formulas:
Proposed Case (all scenarios): the CHP input fuel allocated to the building is calculated as:
ProposedBLDGFUEL = (CHP_ELECBLDG / CHP_ELECTOTAL) * CHPFUEL
Where:
ProposedBLDGFUEL = The proposed case CHP input fuel allocated to the building
CHP_ELECBLDG = The CHP electricity generation allocated to the building (i.e., the result of the
previous calculations)
CHP_ELECTOTAL = The total CHP electricity generated at the DES plant
CHPFUEL = The total CHP fuel input for electricity generation at the DES plant
Baseline Case (scenario B only LEED Canada 2009): If the CHP-generated electricity allocated to the
building exceeds the modelled electricity consumption of the proposed building, then the baseline case is
charged with the CHP input fuel associated with that process electricity in order to hold this portion of
the CHP energy use cost-neutral in the model:
BaselineBLDGFUEL = (PROCESS_ELECBLDG / CHP_ELECTOTAL) * CHPFUEL
with
PROCESS_ELECBLDG = CHP_ELECBLDG - PROPOSED_ELECBLDG
Where:
BaselineBLDGFUEL = The baseline case CHP input fuel charged to the building
PROCESS_ELECBLDG = the amount of allocated CHP electricity in excess of the buildings modelled
annual electricity consumption (treated as process energy in the model)
CHP_ELECTOTAL = (same as above for proposed case)
CHPFUEL = (same as above for proposed case)
CHP_ELECBLDG = (same as above for proposed case)
PROPOSED_ELECBLDG = The modelled electricity consumption for the building from the Method 2
Proposed case
April 1, 2012
Page 26 of 29
CHP Generator Default Efficiencies

Actual efficiency performance data on the CHP serving the project building is preferred, based on either
ongoing operations (existing CHP) or design specifications (new CHP). If the project team cannot obtain the
actual performance data, it is permissible to use the following default seasonal performance values. These
values are conservative, intended to represent a CHP system with relatively low efficiency. A well designed,
maintained, and operating CHP system will generally offer better performance than the defaults listed here.
Default average values are as follows:
Generator Electrical Efficiency 22%

Generator Thermal Efficiency 25%
Single-effect absorption chillers 0.60 COP
Double-effect absorption chillers 0.90 COP
Absorption cooling plant electrical efficiency (including cooling towers and
primary pumps) 40 COP
April 1, 2012
Page 27 of 29
APPENDIX C: Special Situations for DES Energy Models
Service water heating

Many commercial buildings heat their service water using a variety of different sources. If one of those
sources is DES-supplied heat then that is implemented in the energy model according to the Method the
project team is using:
Method 1 (Building Stand-Alone Scenario) no change from the standard guidance in section 2.4:
model the energy source as purchased energy in order to hold the DES cost-neutral for service
water heating.
Method 2 (Aggregate Building / DES Scenario) as a default streamlined method, the CaGBC
recommends modelling the energy source as purchased energy in order to hold the DES costneutral for service water heating. Thus, for service water heating Method 2 is implemented in the
same way as Method 1. If desired, the project team may use an exceptional calculation method to
document DES-related savings from service water heating, but in this event the project team must
fully justify and support the annual energy consumption and cost in both the Baseline Case and the
Proposed Case models.
For either option use a reasonable, well-founded purchased energy rate in the models, such as the actual
rate paid to the DES supplier or a virtual rate derived using a method similar to the one described in section
2.5 of this document.
Heating converted to cooling as part of the LEED project

Generally, district or campus systems that produce heating energy (steam or hot water, whether directly or
as waste heat) serve heating end-use applications in the connected buildings. Sometimes the heating
energy supply is converted to chilled water using absorption chillers or other similar technologies in order to
serve cooling loads instead. In this circumstance the equipment that converts heating to cooling may reside
either within the DES itself (i.e., DES provides cooling to building) or within the connected buildings (i.e., DES
provides heating to building; building converts heating to cooling).
When the equipment converting DES-supplied heat into cooling is part of the LEED projects scope of work,
then the DES guidance in this document must be modified for the EAp2/c1 energy modelling path. The
modifications for this situation are as follows (guidance for all other LEED credits remains unchanged):
1) Model the district heating source servicing the chilled water generation equipment as follows:
For Method 1 (Building Stand-Alone Scenario): use Purchased Heating in both the Baseline
and Proposed Case as described above in Section 2.5.
For Method 2 (Aggregate Building / DES Scenario): use a virtual upstream DES plant for the
Proposed Case and compare it to code-compliant on-site equipment for the Baseline Case as
described above in Section 2.5.
April 1, 2012
Page 28 of 29
2) Model absorption chiller(s) in the Baseline Case as follows:
When the purchased heating is hot water with average supply temperatures below 150C (300
F), the chiller(s) shall be modelled as single-effect absorption chiller(s) (0.7 COP); when the
purchased heating is steam or hot water with average temperatures greater than or equal to
150C (300F), the chiller(s) shall be modelled as double-effect absorption chiller(s) (1.0 COP).
Building conditioned floor area 11,150 m2 (120,000 ft2) : 1 water-cooled absorption chiller
Building conditioned floor area > 11,150 m2 (120,000 ft2) : 2 water-cooled absorption chillers
minimum with chillers added so that no chiller is larger than 800 tons, all sized equally
For a project including BOTH absorption chillers driven by purchased hot water AND electric
chillers on site, the type and quantity of absorption chillers shall be as identified above, and the
type and quantity of electric chillers shall be as in ASHRAE 90.1 Table G3.1.3.7 (or DX equipment
as specified), but the total capacity ratio of electric to absorption cooling shall be identical to
that of the proposed design.
For a project including BOTH district chilled water AND absorption chillers on site driven by
purchased heating, the type and quantity of absorption chillers shall be as identified above, and
purchased cooling shall also be modelled in accordance with this document. However, the total
capacity ratio of the on-site cooling to purchased cooling shall be identical to that of the
Proposed design.
3) Model the Baseline Case cooling towers, pumps, chilled water loop configurations, and loop
temperature controls as indicated in ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G.
4) Model the absorption chiller(s) in the Proposed Case based on the as-designed type and capacity of
chillers
Other DES scenarios not covered in this document

If this document does not cover a DES scenario, such as chillers driven by steam, thermal plant energy inputs
without local market prices, or very large, complex DES networks, the applicant is recommended to submit a
Credit Interpretation Request (CIR) to the CaGBC for consideration.
April 1, 2012
Page 29 of 29

LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide For District

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

LEED Canada 2009 Interpretation Guide For District

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

LEEDCANADA2009

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

PREFACE FROM THE CaGBC

For more information:

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

DISCLAIMER AND NOTICES

Jack Meredith (Chair)

HGBC Healthy Green Building Consulting

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

DISTRICT OR CAMPUS THERMAL ENERGY GUIDANCE ............................................................................................... 8

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

1.1 Executive Summary

EA Prerequisite 1 (Fundamental Commissioning): An ongoing program of performance monitoring and

Energy Performance (EAp2 and EAc1):

Method 1 (streamlined path) model district or campus thermal energy as purchased

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

Refrigerant Management (EAp3 and EAc4)

Monitoring and Verification (EAc5)

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

DISTRICT OR CAMPUS THERMAL ENERGY GUIDANCE

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

2.3 Summary of Submittal Requirements

EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning

EAc3: Best Practice or Enhanced Commissioning

Description of upstream systems to be included/excluded in the credit scope, supported by a

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

EAp2/c1: Energy Performance

Description of upstream systems to be included/excluded in the credit scope with reference to

Performance Path Method 1 (streamlined path) the building stand-alone scenario:

Virtual DES rate calculation.

EAc1 point calculation.

Performance Path Method 2 (full accounting) the aggregate building/DES scenario:

Energy rates utilized and rationale.

EAc2: Renewable Energy

Detailed description of the renewable energy systems.

EAp3: Fundamental Refrigerant Management

EAc4: Enhanced Refrigerant Management

EAc5: Measurement & Verification

Description of upstream systems to be included/excluded in the credit scope and rationale.

References to M&V Plan addressing upstream DES systems.

EAc6: Green Power

Calculations indicating renewable contributions from the DES, supported by a rationale.

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

2.4 Commissioning (EAp1 and EAc3)

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

2.5 Energy Performance (EAp2 and EAc1)

Method 1 (streamlined path) Building Stand-alone Scenario

Method 2 (full accounting) Aggregate Building / DES Scenario

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

LEED Canada v1.x

N/A (see Appendix A)

LEED Canada v2009

LEED Canada CS***

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

2.5.1.1 Energy Rates for Method 1 - Building Stand-alone Scenario

Virtual DES Rate Methodology:

Virtual DES Rate Formulae:

(where MMBtu = 1 million Btu)

District Hot Water Rate = Virtual Fuel Rate x 1.6

LEED CANADA 2009 INTERPRETATION GUIDE FOR DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEMS

Changes from App G Baseline

District Energy System Used in Proposed Design: