Achieving near Zero and Positive Energy Settlements in ...zeroplus.org/pdf/ZERO PLUS_D4.2.pdf · 6.0 30.06.2017 Updated Italian case study description in section 4.2 (new location

Achieving near Zero and Positive Energy Settlements in Europe using

Advanced Energy Technology H2020 - 678407

D4.2 EFFECTIVE MONITORING PROTOCOLS TO BE

IMPLEMENTED IN THE OUTDOOR AREAS OF EACH SETTLEMENT

AND AN OVERALL REPORT ABOUT TECHNICAL DETAILS AND

MOTIVATION OF SELECTED PROCEDURES

Authors: Anna Laura Pisello, Cristina Piselli (UNIPG)

Contributing authors: Christina Georgatou, Denia Kolokotsa, Kostas Kalaitzakis, Kostas Gompakis (TUC), Filippo Ubertini, Franco Cotana, Gloria Pignatta, Veronica Lucia Castaldo, Claudia Fabiani, Ilaria Pigliautile (UNIPG)

D 4.2 Effective monitoring protocols to be implemented in the outdoor areas of each

settlement and an overall report about technical details and motivation of selected procedures

Page 2 of 60

Deliverable nature: Report Dissemination level: Public Contractual delivery date: May 2016 Delivery date: May 2016 Version: 6.1 Number of pages: 60 Keywords: Monitoring protocols; Technologies energy performance

monitoring; Settlement outdoor microclimate monitoring; Web-GIS monitoring platform; M&V Plan

Lead beneficiary 4 – UNIPG Participating beneficiaries: 1 – UoA

2 – TUM 3 –BGU

4 – UNIPG 5 – OBU 6 – CYI 7 – TUC 8 – ABB

9 – ANERDGY 11 – ARCA

13 – OPAC38 14 – VASSILIOU 15 – CONTEDIL

16 – JRHT



Page 3 of 60

History of changes

Version Date Change Page 1.1 24.02.2016 1st draft - 1.2 04.03.2016 1st internal review - 2.1 08.03.2016 2nd draft - 2.2 30.03.2016 1st external review - 3.1 14.04.2016 3rd draft - 3.2 22.04.2016 2nd external review - 4.1 26.04.2016 4th draft - 4.2 29.04.2016 Internal review - 5.1 10.05.2016 5th draft for internal review round - 5.2 12.05.2016 Final complete report sent to the coordinator - 5.3 19.05.2016 Revised version by the coordinator - 5.4 20.05.2016 Final complete report to be uploaded 60 6.0 30.06.2017 Updated Italian case study description in section

4.2 (new location is Granarolo dell’ Emilia, old location was Novafeltria, Rimini)

53-55

6.1 25.05.2018 Update to satisfy data protection regulation 53-56



Page 4 of 60

Executive Summary The second WP4 deliverable D4.2 “Effective monitoring protocols to be implemented

in the outdoor areas of each settlement and an overall report about technical details

and motivation of selected procedures” deals with the results of development of task

T4.2 “Development of monitoring protocols for the specific energy systems and

components at the settlement scale”. The main purposes of the present WP4 task

are:

to critically review existing monitoring protocols and technologies used for

measuring actual energy savings and environmental conditions achieved by

innovative technologies for NZE settlements;

to develop effective and customized monitoring protocols and procedures to

control and optimize environmental conditions of all the case study NZE

settlements;

to develop effective and customized monitoring protocols to measure the

actual (in-situ) energy needs, savings and generation through technologies in

all the case study NZE settlements common spaces.

Therefore, effective and customized monitoring protocols have to be developed,

based on improved existing monitoring protocols and technologies, in order to

measure energy needs and generation and control the environmental conditions in

the outdoor common areas of the four case study settlements.

After a brief description of the deliverable in section 1, section 2 reports the review of

existing internationally available Measurement and Verification (M&V) protocols. In

particular, three M&V protocols have been considered for implementation in the

ZERO-PLUS Project monitoring system, i.e. (i) the International Performance

Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP), (ii) the ASHRAE Guideline 14 on

Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings, and (iii) the M&V protocol specifically

developed for Net Zero Energy Buildings within the IEA SHC/ECBCS Joint Project

Task 40/Annex 52 - Towards Net Zero Energy solar Buildings. Then, the main

technical and operational characteristics of the monitoring procedure implemented in

this project at settlement level are described in section 3.



Page 5 of 60

Accordingly, section 4 reports a preliminary definition of the M&V Plan used in each

case study settlement, including the description of the settlements layout. Finally, the

main conclusions and future developments of the monitoring protocol adopted in the

ZERO-PLUS project are summarized in section 5, preparing the ground for the

following dedicated WP7.



Page 6 of 60

Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 4

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................. 6

List of figures ......................................................................................................................... 7

List of tables .......................................................................................................................... 8

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 9

2. Review of existing monitoring protocols and technologies ............................................ 11

3. ZERO-PLUS Project monitoring protocol at settlement scale ........................................ 41

4. Description of the four ZERO-PLUS case study settlements......................................... 52

5. Conclusions and future developments.......................................................................... 57

6. References .................................................................................................................. 59

Annex I................................................................................................................................ 60



Page 7 of 60

List of figures Figure 1. Process of IPMVP Option selection [4] .................................................................. 21 Figure 2. Path of the whole-facility approach [5] ................................................................... 31 Figure 3. Path of the calibrated simulation approach [5] ....................................................... 32 Figure 4. IPMVP Options implemented in the ZERO-PLUS project at design and ex-post stages ................................................................................................................................. 43 Figure 5. Architecture of a Web based GIS system .............................................................. 50 Figure 6. Screen shot (hypothetical) of the Web-GIS, dashboard/maps and 3D visualization 51 Figure 7. Screen shot (hypothetical) of the Web-GIS, 3D visualization ................................. 51 Figure 8. 3D render of the open spaces in the Cypriot settlement......................................... 53 Figure 9. 3D render of one of the buildings of the Italian settlement with surroundings. ........ 54 Figure 10. 3D render of the open spaces in the French settlement ....................................... 55 Figure 11. 3D view of the open spaces in the English settlement ......................................... 56



Page 8 of 60

List of tables Table 1. Summary of IPMVP Options [4]............................................................................... 19 Table 2. Different Guideline 14 approaches to determine savings [2] ................................... 30 Table 3. Common sensors for the measurements of energy flows in buildings [6] ................ 35 Table 4. Different monitoring levels with associated IEQ parameters [6] ............................... 36 Table 5. Steps for the implementation of a M&V protocol for Net ZEBs in the planning phase [6] ............................................................................................................................. 38 Table 6. Steps for the implementation of a M&V protocol for Net ZEBs in the installation phase [6] ............................................................................................................................. 39 Table 7. Steps for the implementation of a M&V protocol for Net ZEBs in the operation phase [6] ....................................................................................................................................... 39 Table 8. Technical specifications of the data collection ........................................................ 47



Page 9 of 60

1. Introduction The aim of this deliverable D4.2 report is to describe the activities carried out within

the framework of WP4 and their main outputs, in order to fulfill task T4.2. In

particular, this deliverable deals with (i) the description of the existing monitoring

protocols and technologies for energy consumption/production and environmental

conditions in outdoor areas, (ii) the development of dedicated monitoring protocols

for the measure of energy needs, savings, and production in the common areas of

the four case study NZE settlements, and (iii) the development of dedicated

monitoring protocols for the assessment of the real microclimate conditions in the

outdoor common areas of the four case study NZE settlements. Furthermore, (iv) the

preparatory activities for the consistent WP7 tasks are presented.

According to the ZERO-PLUS project description in the Grant Agreement, in task

T4.2 a critical analysis of existing monitoring protocols and procedures used in the

partner countries, i.e. UK, Cyprus, France, and Italy, and beyond to verify the energy

performance of energy technologies is carried out. Pros and cons of existing

methods and instruments for settlement monitoring are also evaluated. The

comparative selection of the most suitable systems for the ZERO-PLUS project

purposes is then performed. The proposed monitoring protocols has to take into

account the following requirements: (i) high resolution (five-minute to half-hourly) to

identify variations in energy use, (ii) co-incident analysis to correlate energy use

events against environmental performance, (iii) over a sufficiently long period of time,

typically a season or one year, to isolate seasonal or other effects, and (iv) remotely

monitored data in web-based platforms.

The monitoring protocols have to involve social, microclimate, engineering, and

architectural aspects of the settlement. The main aim of such protocols is to allow a

comparison between design predictions and final performance of the outdoor

environment and innovative technologies in common areas of the four NZE

settlement. Moreover, a Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE), based on physical and

social surveys (quantitative and qualitative), monitoring, and questionnaires, will be

carried out in order to understand occupants’ subjective reactions to objective data of

environmental parameters. Findings from the baseline outdoor monitoring and the

surveys will be analyzed to optimally develop innovative protocols and achieve the

final target in each settlement. Furthermore, specific barriers of major and minor



Page 10 of 60

impact of the monitoring system will be assessed. To this end, the main objectives of

the present deliverable are:

to critically review existing monitoring protocols and technologies used for

measuring actual energy savings and environmental conditions achieved by

innovative technologies for NZE settlements;

to develop effective and customized monitoring protocols and procedures to

control and optimize environmental conditions of all the case study NZE

settlements;

to develop effective and customized monitoring protocols to measure the

actual (in-situ) energy needs, savings, and generation through technologies in

all the case study NZE settlements common spaces.



Page 11 of 60

2. Review of existing monitoring protocols and technologies

2.1 Introduction In order to assess the actual performance of buildings with ambitious design energy

performance targets, e.g. Net Zero Energy Buildings, the predicted energy efficiency

needs to be validated through measured data. Therefore, the development of

standard measurement and verification procedures is required. In fact, Measurement

and Verification (M&V) processes are aimed at monitoring and quantifying energy

savings derived from Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) in buildings and

settlements, i.e. such projects or technologies implemented in order to reduce energy

consumption in buildings. They allow to isolate and evaluate how much energy the

ECM has avoided using, rather than the total cost saved, which can be affected by

several other factors.

In this view, field monitoring becomes a primary step in energy-efficiency projects,

since it allows to observe building and settlements real operation parameters for the

evaluation of systems energy performance. It is not only aimed at controlling building

facilities to ensure suitable comfort conditions, but it fosters energy efficiency by

increasing the awareness of occupants with respect to energy uses, suggesting

energy saving measures to be adopted and evaluating them afterwards. Moreover, it

permits to verify that a buildings and associated energy technologies perform within

design expectations. From this perspective, monitoring results can be used as

evidence to retain or revoke building energy performance labels. Furthermore, it can

also promote the identification of claimed energy efficient design solutions so they

can faster be entered into the market.

Measurements, sampled and recorded at regular intervals, and data post-processing

have to be planned according to the specific case study. Therefore, the elaboration of

a “M&V Plan” is a key part of the process. It enables to define the monitoring

procedure to conduct the energy savings analysis before the ECMs are implemented,

based on ECMs different characteristics.

Various reliable Measurement and Verification protocols are internationally available.

The International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) [1] is

one of most widespread and has become the national measurement and verification

standard in the United States and in many other countries. Similarly, the ASHRAE



Page 12 of 60

Guideline 14 on Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings [2] is a well-known

monitoring protocol. On the other hand, within the IEA SHC/ECBCS Joint Project

Task 40/Annex 52 -Towards Net Zero Energy solar Buildings [3] a M&V protocol has

been developed specifically for Net ZEB.

The three above mentioned existing M&V protocols have been considered for

implementation in the ZERO-PLUS project monitoring system. This monitoring

system will then effectively support the control and optimized operation of the outdoor

environmental conditions (i.e. street lighting, etc.) via the Integrated Resources

Management System that will be installed in the settlements. Therefore, their main

technical and operational characteristics are described in sub-sections 2.2 and 2.3.

Instead, the following sub-section summarized the main general requirements of an

M&V Plan.

2.1.1 M&V Plan requirements A key component of a M&V protocol is the M&V Plan, which has to be shaped based

on the requirements of the specific project. Based on the existing monitoring

protocols indications [1] the main information to be reported in the Plan are as

follows:

Description of the implemented ECMs, their intended results, and the

operational verification procedures that will be used to verify the effectiveness

of each ECM.

Selection of the IPMVP Option that will be used to determine savings and the

measurement boundary of the savings determination. Any possible interactive

effect beyond the measurement boundary, together with their possible effects,

has to be described.

Indication of the baseline conditions within the measurement boundary, i.e. (i)

period, (ii) energy consumption and demand data, (iii) independent variables

and static factors (occupancy and operating conditions) coinciding with the

energy data conditions, (iv) adjustments, (v) characteristics of building

envelope and equipment, and (vi) measurement equipment information. The

baseline documentation typically requires well-documented short term

metering activities.



Page 13 of 60

Identification of the reporting period.

Definition of a set of conditions to which energy measurements will be

adjusted. The conditions for the basis for adjustment determine whether

savings are reported as avoided energy or as normalized savings.

Description of the exact data analysis procedures, algorithms, and

assumptions to be used in each savings report.

Specification of the energy prices used to value the savings, and whether and

how savings will be adjusted if energy prices change during the ECM or in the

future.

Indication of the metering points and period, if metering is not continuous, and

assignment of responsibilities for reporting and recording during the reporting

period.

Evaluation of the expected accuracy associated with the measurement, data

capture, sampling, and data analysis.

Evaluation of savings uncertainty, a procedure by which the uncertainty of a

measured or calculated value is determined, i.e. the degree of confidence in

the true value when using a measurement and/or calculation procedure.

Definition of the process budget and the required resources, both initial setup

costs and on-going costs throughout the reporting period.

Description of results report format and quality-assurance procedures that will

be used for savings reports.

Furthermore, a definition table of the terms used has to be added at the beginning of

the Plan.

2.2 International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP)

2.2.1 Objectives The International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) is

owned by the Efficiency Valuation Organization (EVO), a non-profit corporation that

was born under the initiative by the United States Department of Energy to develop



Page 14 of 60

an international monitoring and verification protocol. In fact, the IPMVP was

developed by a coalition of international organizations led by the U.S. Department of

Energy and it was first published in 1996, under the name North American Energy

Measurement and Verification Protocol(NEMVP).

Such protocol involves currently available techniques for verifying results of (i) energy

efficiency, (ii) water efficiency, and (iii) renewable energy projects in commercial and

industrial facilities. It is also used by facility operators to assess and improve facility

performance. Therefore, Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) considered for the

energy saving analysis in the IPMVP include fuel saving measures, water efficiency

measures, load shifting and energy reductions through installation or retrofit of

equipment, and/or modification of operating procedures.

The main purpose of the protocol is to increase investment in energy and water

efficient and renewable energy solutions. Therefore, it aims at (i) increasing certainty,

reliability, and level of savings, (ii) reducing transaction costs by providing an

international, industry consensus approach and methodologies, and (iii) reducing

financing costs by providing a project with a Measurement and Verification Plan

(M&V Plan) standardization. Furthermore, it provides a basis for demonstrating

emission reduction and delivering enhanced environmental quality and a basis for

negotiating the contractual terms to ensure that an energy efficiency project achieves

or exceeds its goals of saving money and improving energy efficiency.

2.2.2 Characteristics The Core Concepts of IPMVP are detailed in EVO 10000 – 1:2014 [4] It reports the

key principles used to assess the adherence of a M&V process to IPMVP, which are

as follows.

Accuracy: the protocol has to be as accurate as possible based on the project

value. Accuracy trade-offs have to be justified by increased conservativeness

and increased use of estimates and judgments. Furthermore, costs should be

lower with respect to the monetary value of the savings being evaluated and

they should be consistent with the financial implications of the project

performance.



Page 15 of 60

Completeness: measurements have to quantify the significant effects of the

project and the report of energy savings should consider all effects.

Conservativeness: as above mentioned for accuracy, the procedure has to be

designed to underestimate savings, where judgments are made about

uncertain quantities.

Consistency: the report of project energy effectiveness should be consistent

with different energy efficiency and new energy supply projects, different

energy management professionals, different periods of time for the same

project.

Relevancy: the critical and less predictable performance parameters for the

specific project aims have to be estimated.

Transparency: all the M&V activities have to be clearly disclosed, including

the presentation of the elements defined in the M&V Plan and in the report,

respectively.

2.2.3 IPMVP Options Different Options are provided within IPMVP for developing and implementing a M&V

process and, therefore, different methods for determining energy savings. The Option

choice depends of various considerations, based on the specific project (Figure 1). In

particular, the location of the ECM measurement boundary is a key parameter to be

taken into account. Four different Options, i.e. A, B, C, and D, are provided. If

savings are determined at the facility level, Option C or D may be favored. However,

if only the performance of the ECM is considered, a retrofit-isolation technique is

more suitable (Option A, B, or D). Table 1 summarizes the four Options that are

described as follows.

Option A - Retrofit Isolation: Key Parameter Measurement

Retrofit isolation is used when retrofits affect only a portion of the facility and,

therefore, measurement boundary can be reduced in order to decrease the

effort required to monitor independent variables and static factors. Since

measurement is of only a part of the facility, the results of retrofit isolation

techniques cannot be correlated to the facility total energy use. In Option A,

savings are determined by field measurement of the sole key performance



Page 16 of 60

parameters which define the energy use of systems affected by ECMs and/or

the success of the project. Not-measured parameters during field

measurement are estimated. Estimates can be based on historical data,

manufacturer’s specifications, or engineering judgment. Documentation of the

source or justification of the estimated parameter is required.

Parameters may be continuously or periodically measured for short periods.

The decision of whether to measure continuously or periodically is based on

the expected amount of variation in the parameter. If measurement is not

continuous, meters may be removed between readings. The location of the

measurement and the characteristics of the measurement devices have to be

described in the M&V Plan, along with the procedure for calibrating the meter

being used. Portable meters may be used if only short-term metering is

needed.

Option A is best applied where (i) estimation of non-key parameters may

avoid possibly difficult non-routine adjustments when future changes happen

within the measurement boundary, (ii) uncertainty created by estimations is

acceptable, (iii) continued effectiveness of the ECM can be assessed by

simple routine re-testing of key parameters, (iv) estimation of some

parameters is less costly than measurement of them or simulation, (v) key

parameters used to judge a project performance in computing savings can be

readily identified. A typical application is lighting retrofit where the power

drawn can be monitored and hours of operation can be estimated.

Option B - Retrofit Isolation: All Parameter Measurement

Option B is similar to Option A, but savings are determined by field

measurement of all key performance parameters which define the energy use

of the ECM-affected system.

Energy savings created by most types of ECMs can be determined with

Option B. However, the degree of difficulty and costs increase as metering

complexity increases. Option B methods is generally more difficult and costly

than those of Option A, but it will produce more certain results where load or

savings patterns are variable. Additional costs may be justifiable if a

contractor is responsible for factors affecting energy savings.



Page 17 of 60

Option B is best applied where (i) meters added for isolation purposes will be

used for other purposes such as operational feedback or tenant billing, (ii)

measurement of the parameters is less costly than simulation, (iii) savings or

operations within measurement boundary are variable. A typical application is

lighting retrofit where both power drawn and hours of operation are recorded.

Option C - Whole-Facility

Option C involves the use of utility meters, whole-facility meters, or sub-

meters to assess the energy performance of a total facility. The measurement

boundary encompasses either the whole facility or a major section. Therefore,

the collective savings of all ECMs applied to the part of the facility monitored

by the energy meter are determined. Also, since whole-facility meters are

used, savings reported include the positive or negative effects of any non-

ECM changes made in the facility. This approach is likely to require a

regression analysis or similar to account for independent variables, e.g.

outdoor air temperature.

Whole-facility energy measurements can use the utility meters, whose data

are considered 100%accurate for determining savings because it defines the

payment for energy. Also, separate meters can be installed to measure

whole-facility energy. The accuracy of these meters should be considered in

the M&V Plan, together with indications on how to compare its readings with

the utility meter readings.

Option C is best applied where (i) energy performance of the whole facility will

be assessed, not just the ECMs, (ii) there are many types of ECMs in one

facility, (iii) ECMs involve activities whose individual energy use is difficult to

separately measure, (iv) savings are large compared to the variance in the

baseline data, during the reporting period, (v) retrofit-isolation techniques

(Option A or B) are excessively complex, (vi) significant future changes to the

facility are not expected during the reporting period, (vii)) system of tracking

static factors can be established to enable possible future non-routine

adjustment, (viii) reasonable correlations can be found between energy use

and other independent variables. Typical examples may include

measurement of a facility where several ECMs have been implemented, or

where the single ECM is expected to affect all equipment in a facility.



Page 18 of 60

Option D - Calibrated Simulation

Option D involves the use of computer simulation software to predict the

energy use of the whole facility, or of a sub-facility. Simulation routines are

demonstrated to adequately model actual energy performance measured in

the facility. However, the simulation model must be calibrated so that it

predicts an energy pattern that approximately matches actual metered data.

Option D may be used to assess the performance of ECMs in the whole

facility, alike to Option C. Moreover, simulation tool used in Option D allows to

estimate the savings attributable to each ECM within a multiple ECM project.

Also, Option D may also be used to assess just the performance of individual

systems within a facility, as Options A and B.

Whole-building-simulation software with hourly calculation techniques may be

used. On the other hand, simplified HVAC system models may also be used if

building heat losses, heat gains, internal loads, and HVAC systems are

simple. Also, other special-purpose programs may be used to simulate

energy use and operation of devices or industrial processes. Calibration of

building simulations is usually done with twelve monthly utility bills, which

should be from a period of stable operation. The software and the calibration

procedure and data, along with a description of its sources, should be

documented in the M&V Plan.

Therefore, savings are determined using calibrated simulation results

representing the baseline energy or there porting-period energy. For projects

with a physical baseline, the two calibrated models include one with the

ECMs and one without them.

Option D is usually used where no other option is feasible. It is best where (i)

either baseline energy data or reporting period energy data, but not both, are

unavailable or unreliable, (ii) there are too many ECMs to assess using

Options A or B, (iii) ECMs involve diffuse activities, which cannot easily be

isolated from the rest of the facility, such as operator training or wall and

window upgrades, (iv) performance of each ECM will be estimated

individually within a multiple ECM project, but the costs of Options A or B are

excessive, (v) interactions between ECMs or ECM interactive effects are

complex, making the isolation techniques of Options A and B impractical, (vi)

upcoming significant changes to the facility are expected during the reporting



Page 19 of 60

period, with no accounting for the energy use or impact, (vii) experienced

energy simulation professional is able to gather appropriate input data to

calibrate the simulation model, (viii) facility and ECMs can be modeled by

well-documented simulation software, (ix) simulation software predicts

metered calibration data with acceptable accuracy, (x) twelve months of

performance is measured, immediately following installation and

commissioning of the energy management program. Typical applications may

include measurement of a facility where several ECMs have been

implemented, but no historical energy data is available.

Table 1. Summary of IPMVP Options [4]

IPMVP Option How Savings Are Calculated Typical Applications A. Retrofit Isolation: Key Parameter Measurement Savings are determined by field measurement of the key performance parameter(s), which define the energy use of the ECM's affected system(s) or the success of the project. Measurement frequency ranges from short-term to continuous, depending on the expected variations in the measured parameter, and the length of the reporting period. Parameters not selected for field measurements are estimated. Estimates can be based on historical data, manufacturer's specifications, or engineering judgment. Documentation of the source or justification of the estimated parameter is required. The plausible savings error arising from estimation rather than measurement is evaluated.

Engineering calculation of baseline and reporting period energy from short-term or continuous measurements of key operating parameter(s) and estimated values. Routine and non-routine adjustments as required.

A lighting retrofit where: - Power draw is the key

performance parameter that is measured periodically;

- lighting operating hours are estimated based on facility schedules and occupant behavior.

B. Retrofit Isolation: All Parameter Measurement Savings are determined by field measurement of the energy use of the ECM affected system. Measurement frequency ranges from short-term to continuous, depending on the expected variations in the savings and the length of the reporting period.

Short term or continuous measurements of baseline and reporting period energy, or engineering computations using measurements of proxies of energy uses. Routines and non-routine adjustments as required.

Application of a variable speed drive and controls to a motor to adjust pump flow. Measure electric power with a kW meter installed on the electrical supply to the motor, which reads the power every minute. In the baseline period this meter is in place for a week to verify constant loading. The meter is in place throughout the reporting



Page 20 of 60

period to track variations in power use.

C. Whole-Facility Savings are determined by measuring energy use at the whole facility or sub-facility level. Continuous measurements of the entire facility's energy use are taken throughout the reporting period.

Analysis of whole facility baseline and reporting period (utility) meter data. Routine adjustments as required, using techniques such as simple comparison or regression analysis. Non-routine adjustments as required.

Multifaceted energy management program affecting many systems in a facility. Measure energy use with the gas and electric utility meters for a twelve-month baseline period and throughout the reporting period.

D. Calibrated Simulation Savings are determined through simulation of the energy use of the whole facility, or of a sub-facility. Simulation routines are demonstrated to adequately model actual energy performance in the facility. This option usually requires considerable skill in calibrated simulation.

Energy use simulation, calibrated with hourly or monthly utility billing data. (Energy end use metering may be used to help refine input data).

Multifaceted energy management program affecting many systems in a facility, but where no meter existed in the baseline period. Energy use measurement, after installation of gas and electric meters, is used to calibrate a simulation. Baseline energy use, determine during the calibrated simulation, is compared to a simulation ofreporting period energy use.



Page 21 of 60

Figure 1. Process of IPMVP Option selection [4]

2.2.4 Implementation and operation Before the savings verification activities, a low-cost initial step for realizing savings

potential is the operational verification. Different operational verification methods

exist and the selection depends on the ECM's characteristics, as following listed:



Page 22 of 60

Visual Inspection: view and verify the physical installation of the ECM. It is

used when ECM will perform as anticipated when properly installed: direct

measurement of ECM performance is not possible.

Sample Spot Measurements: measure single or multiple key energy (use

parameters for a representative sample of the ECMs installation). It is used

when achieved ECM performance can vary from published data based on

installation details or component load.

Short-Term Performance Testing: may involve conducting test designed to

capture the component operating over its full range or performance data

collection over sufficient period of time to characterize the full range of

operation. It is used when ECM performance may vary depending on actual

load, controls or interoperability of components. Test for functionality and

proper control. Measure key energy use parameters.

Data Trending and Control-Logic Review: set up trends and review data or

control logic. Measurement period may last for a few days to a few weeks,

depending on the period needed to capture the full range of performance. It is

used when ECM performance may vary depending on actual load and

controls. Component or system is being monitored and controlled through

BAS or can be monitored through independent meters.

Concerning savings verification, they may be determined for an entire facility or

simply for a portion of it, depending upon the purposes of the reporting.

If the purpose of reporting is to help manage only the equipment affected by

the savings program, a measurement boundary should be drawn around that

equipment and significant energy requirements of the equipment can be

determined within the boundary. The approach used is the retrofit-isolation

option. Determination of savings may be by direct measurement of energy

flow or by direct measurement of proxies of energy use.

If the purpose of reporting is to help manage total facility energy performance,

the meters measuring the supply of energy to the total facility can be used to

assess performance and savings. The measurement boundary in this case

encompasses the whole facility (Option C).



Page 23 of 60

If baseline or reporting period data are unreliable or unavailable, energy data

from a calibrated simulation program can take the place or the missing data,

for either part or all of the facility (Option D).

If some of the energy requirements of the systems or equipment being

assessed arise outside a practical measurement boundary, only significant

energy effects of the ECMs should be determined from measurements, the

rest being estimated or ignored.

Any energy effects occurring beyond the notional measurement boundary are

called interactive effects or leakages. The magnitude of these interactive

effects needs to be estimated or evaluated in order to determine their

influence in energy savings.

The baseline measurement period has to be selected within the period immediately

before commitment to undertake the retrofit and in order to represent a full operating

cycle, from maximum energy use to minimum, of the facility. Moreover, it has to

include only time periods for which fixed and variable energy-governing facts are

known about the facility. Similarly, the reporting period should consider at least one

normal operating cycle of the equipment or facility, in order to fully characterize the

savings effectiveness in operating modes. The length definition should take into

account the life of the ECM and the probability of degradation of originally achieved

savings over time. Some projects may stop reporting savings after a defined test

period ranging from an instantaneous reading to a year or two. On the other hand,

metering may be left in place after the reporting period to provide feedback of

operating data for routine management purposes and specifically to detect

subsequent adverse changes in performance. When an ECM can be turned on and

off easily, baseline and reporting periods may be selected that are adjacent to each

other in time (on/off test).

Finally, the adjustment terms, which are used to modify the measured energy data to

reflect the same set of conditions as the baseline term, should be computed from

identifiable physical facts about the energy governing characteristics of equipment

within the measurement boundary. Two types of adjustments are possible:

Routine adjustments: for any energy governing factors expected to change

routinely during the reporting period, e.g. weather. Valid mathematical

techniques must be used to derive the adjustment method.



Page 24 of 60

Non-routine adjustments: for those energy governing factors which are not

usually expected to change, e.g. facility size, type of occupants, etc. The

associated static factors must be monitored for change throughout the

reporting period.

2.3 ASHRAE Guideline 14 on Measurement of Energy, Demand, and Water Savings

2.3.1 Objectives Guideline 14 [5] was developed by ASHRAE (American Society of Heating,

Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers) in 2002 and, then, updated in 2014to fill

a need for a standardized set of energy, demand, and water savings calculation

procedures. The intent is to provide guidance on minimum acceptable levels of

performance for determining energy, demand, and water savings, using

measurements, in commercial transactions. ASHRAE Guideline 14 is used for

transactions between energy service companies (ESCOs) and their customers and

between ESCOs and utilities, where the utilities have elected to purchase energy

savings. Other applications of ASHRAE Guideline 14 may include documenting

energy savings for various credit programs, e.g. emission reduction credits

associated with energy efficiency activities. Determining savings with measurements

in accordance with this guideline involves measuring post-retrofit energy use and

comparing that to the measured pre-retrofit use, adjusted or normalized, to act as a

proxy for the conditions that would have prevailed had the retrofit not been

performed. Therefore, determining energy savings through the use of measurements

involves more than just verifying that new equipment has been installed and can

function as expected, although those tasks are usually a necessary part of

determining savings. In addition, energy savings cannot be claimed to be “measured”

if no pre-retrofit data are available. Sampling is often used in projects involving end-

use monitoring or what we call the “retrofit isolation approach.”

ASHRAE Guideline 14 may be used to measure the energy savings from a utility

sponsored or contracted multiple-building energy conservation project. Also

procedures to calculate the added uncertainty due to sampling is given. The

document provides procedures for using measured pre-retrofit and post-retrofit billing

data for the calculation of energy, demand, and water savings. Therefore, the

procedure (i) includes the determination of savings from individual facilities or meters,



Page 25 of 60

(ii) applies to all forms of energy, including renewables and wastewater, and (iii)

encompasses all types of facilities: residential, commercial, institutional, and

industrial.

2.3.2 Characteristics Firstly, the general procedure of the ASHRAE Guideline 14 involves the selection of

relevant independent variables that directly or indirectly determine the energy use or

demand of the system and which change during the baseline and/or post-installation

period. The most significant independent variables must be identified, measured over

the periods of interest, and then considered in any savings computation. For

instance, the main significant independent variables are weather, occupancy, and

production level. The measurement methodology, the duration, and frequency of

measurements of independent variables depends on the availability of the data, the

fraction of expected savings, and the desired level of uncertainty in determining

savings.

Then, the baseline period has to be selected including data across the full range of

expected operating conditions, modes, and independent variables. Where possible,

the baseline operating conditions should be similar to the expected operating

conditions for the post-retrofit period, to minimize bias or error from unaccounted for

factors. Therefore, the baseline period is typically the period immediately before the

retrofit and should represent one or more complete operating cycles. During the

baseline period, all baseline conditions has to be documented which include all of the

parameters that can affect the energy use of systems inside the measurement

boundary, including both independent variables and static factors, e.g. plants,

space/volume, process loads, etc.

On the other hand, the duration of the post-retrofit measurements of the variables

used in calculating savings has to be selected in order to measure over a period of

time that is sufficient to (i) encompass all operating modes of the retrofitted

system(s), (ii) span the full range of independent variables normally expected for the

reporting period, and (iii) provide the intended level of certainty in the reported

savings. Also, the number, type, end-to-end accuracy, and cost of the measurement

equipment has to be selected and documented in the detailed M&V plan. All meters

for measuring energy use, demand or independent variables introduce error. Meter



Page 26 of 60

error can be a significant factor affecting the uncertainty in computed savings. The

number and location of the measurement devices also influences the level of

uncertainty. Moreover, measurement equipment used should be calibrated prior to

use and recalibrated at the intervals recommended by the manufacturer.

Considering the calculation procedure, it has to be taken into account that conditions,

such as weather and usage, that govern energy use or demand are usually different

between the baseline and post-retrofit periods. Therefore, measured use and

demand must be normalized to a common set of conditions in order to report savings

properly. The changes in conditions can be either routine or non-routine. Routine

adjustments are the adjustments that are expected to occur frequently during the

reporting period, while non-routine adjustments are due to changes to static factors

that affect the energy use of the systems inside the measurement boundary. Weather

data are the most common independent variable affecting energy use and demand.

Weather data include a wide variety of measurements and observations, but the

most common parameters that affect energy use are outdoor air temperature and

humidity. Solar radiation and/or cloud cover, wind speed, and direction can affect

building energy use and are more commonly used to evaluate the performance of

renewable energy measures. Precipitation can be also an important variable.

Accurate and consistent measurement and observations of weather conditions are

critical. Data obtained from government weather stations are considered to be very

reliable, but the limited number of government weather stations and the variations in

microclimates may justify the use of on-site instrumentation.

Finally, the guideline presents simplified methods of assessing the quantifiable

uncertainty in savings computations. Three primary sources of quantifiable

uncertainty are considered, i.e. (i) sampling uncertainty, (ii) measurement equipment

error, and (iii) modeling uncertainty. Other types of uncertainty are not quantifiable,

which include systematic errors, such as human errors and errors of technique, and

additional random or accidental errors, such as errors of judgment and changes in

conditions. Overall savings uncertainty is estimated by considering sample size,

measurement error, modeling uncertainty, length of the savings determination period,

and fraction of baseline energy saved. The estimation procedure can be summarized

as follows:

adjust the measurement and modeling uncertainties to a common confidence

interval;



Page 27 of 60

use the equations given in the guideline in order to match the confidence

levels used in assessing the measurement and modeling uncertainties;

report the confidence level with the uncertainty;

uncertainty associated with any baseline adjustments shall be included by

treating it as part of the error in post-retrofit energy use measurements.

When planning a retrofit project, a target savings uncertainty level should be

established. Guideline equations can then be used to evaluate feasible combinations

of model error, instrument error, sample size, post-retrofit period length, and

expected savings fraction. The costs of feasible combinations of savings

determination characteristics can be evaluated to find the lowest cost means of

achieving the target uncertainty.

2.3.3 Implementation and operation ASHRAE Guideline 14 presents three basic approaches for determining savings and

advises on appropriate application of each. No one way can be used in all situations,

but the selected approach must be tailored to suit each project budget and its need

for certainty and timeliness. This guideline defines terms to help reduce uncertainty

and control the costs of assessing an ECM performance.

The three approaches to determining savings use similar concepts in savings

computation. They differ in how they measure actual energy use and demand

quantities to be used in savings determination. The general methodology to be

carried out in all the different approaches is summarized as follows:

i. Prepare a measurement and verification plan, showing the compliance path,

the metering and analysis procedures, and the expected cost of implementing

the measurement and verification plan throughout the post-retrofit period.

ii. Measure the energy use and/or demand before the retrofits are applied

(baseline). Record factors and conditions that govern energy use and

demand.

iii. Measure the energy use and/or demand after the retrofits are applied (post-

retrofit period). Record factors and conditions that govern post-retrofit period

use and demand.



Page 28 of 60

iv. Project the baseline and post-retrofit period energy use and demand

measurements to a common set of conditions. These common conditions are

normally those of the post-retrofit period, so only baseline period energy use

and demand need to be projected.

v. Subtract the projected post-retrofit period use and/or demand from the

projected baseline period use and/or demand to calculate the savings. Unless

the whole building prescriptive path is followed, assess and report the level of

uncertainty in the annual savings report.

As also summarized in Table 2, the three approaches are [2] :

Retrofit Isolation Approach

The retrofit isolation approach measures the energy use and relevant

independent variables of the individual systems and equipment affected by

the retrofit. The retrofit isolation approach should be used when the whole

building approach is not appropriate and the savings in question can be

determined by measurements taken at a specific equipment item or

subsystem. Measurements of baseline and post-installation energy are

required. The duration of the measurements must be sufficient to capture the

full range of operating conditions. Normalization of the measured energy use

is usually required to account for differences in the operating conditions and

to extrapolate measurements taken over a short period of time to represent

annual energy use. The measurements may be normalized to the conditions

during the baseline period or the actual post-installation operation conditions.

If neither baseline nor post-installation conditions are representative of typical

operating conditions, it may be necessary to define and use “normal”

operating conditions. Both inverse methods and calibrated component

simulations may be used to normalize savings. Savings are determined by

comparing the normalized baseline and post-installation energy use. Savings

derived from isolated and metered systems may be used as the basis for

determining savings in similar but unmetered systems within the same facility,

provided they are subjected to similar operating conditions throughout the

baseline and post-retrofit periods.



Page 29 of 60

Whole-Facility Approach

The whole-facility approach, also called main meter approach, uses the

measured energy use of a building or an entire facility to determine savings. It

encompasses procedures that verify the performance of the retrofits for those

projects where whole building pre- and post-retrofit data are available to

determine the savings. The building or facility energy use may be measured

by the utility meter or by a separate sub-meter for the building or buildings to

be evaluated. Consumption and demand values taken from sub-meters are

acceptable for use under the whole building approach, where the meter

measures energy use of a significant portion of the building area or a group of

subsystems. The data shall meet all the requirements as for a utility meter. It

is most appropriate to use a whole building approach when the total building

performance is to be calculated, rather than the performance of specific

retrofits. There are two paths for the whole building approach, each having

certain criteria and requirements for applicability. This approach may involve

the use of monthly utility billing data or data gathered more frequently from

the utility meter or existing sub-meters. Data regarding other statistically

significant independent variables, such as weather, must be collected during

the same period. If weather data are not available from an on-site source,

data collected by government weather stations may be used. A baseline

model of facility energy use as a function of the independent variables is

developed using inverse methods. The model is validated to ensure it is

representative of baseline conditions. Savings are determined by comparing

the baseline energy use calculated using the baseline model and the

measured post-installation values of the independent variables with the

measured post-installation energy use. The path to be followed in this

approach is reported in Figure 2.

Whole-Building Calibrated Simulation Approach

This approach refers to computer-based simulation of whole building energy

use behavior. The approach involves the use of a computer simulation tool to

create a model of energy use and demand of the facility. This model, which is

typically of pre-retrofit conditions, is calibrated against actual measured

energy, demand, and/or water consumption data. In some cases, additional

data regarding the operation of the building and/or the energy use of specific



Page 30 of 60

systems or loads are used to refine and calibrate the model. The calibrated

model is then used to determine the energy use, demand, and/or water use of

the post-retrofit conditions. Simulations of existing buildings are usually

calibrated against baseline data and then used to determine post-installation

energy use. In cases where baseline data do not exist, the simulations are

calibrated after implementation, and the calibration adjustments are applied to

the baseline model. Calibrating a simulation model to baseline and post-

installation measurements is not recommended because it is difficult to

determine which post-installation calibration adjustments should be applied to

the baseline model. Savings are determined by comparing the calibrated

baseline and post-installation models. This technique is especially applicable

to accounting for multiple energy end-uses, especially where interactions

occur between measures. Additionally, this technique is useful for situations

where baseline shifts may be encountered and where future energy impacts

may need to be accessed. The path to be followed in this approach is

reported in Figure 3.

Table 2. Different Guideline 14 approaches to determine savings [2]

Approach Measurement Boundary

Measurements Required Analysis Methods

Retrofit isolation

Equipment or systems affected by retrofit

- Baseline energy use - Post-installation energy

use - Significant independent

variables

- Inverse methods; include regression analysis

- Calibrated component model

Whole-facility metering

Building or facility - Baseline energy use - Post-installation energy

use - Significant independent

variables

- Inverse methods; include regression analysis

Calibrated simulation

Building or facility - Baseline energy use OR post-installation energy use

- Significant independent variables

- Building simulation models



Page 31 of 60

Figure 2. Path of the whole-facility approach [5]



Page 32 of 60

Figure 3. Path of the calibrated simulation approach [5]

2.4 Measurement and Verification (M&V) protocol for Net ZEBs 2.4.1 Objectives

A dedicated Measurement and Verification protocol for Net Zero Energy Buildings

has been developed within the Joint Project SHC/ECBCS Task 40/Annex 52 -

Towards Net Zero Energy Solar Buildings of the International Energy Agency (IEA).

The technical report of STA of Task 40 is aimed at developing guidelines for the



Page 33 of 60

planning, implementation, and data evaluation for Net ZEB monitoring [6] Such

protocol is focused on the energy performance and indoor environmental conditions

of a single building.

The M&V for Net ZEB has the main purpose to verify that designed Net ZEBs

achieve the target in practice. Although different Net ZEB definitions exist, which

require different metrics and monitoring parameters, each definition can be translated

into a balance. Therefore, checking that a building is in compliance with the Net ZEB

definition requires to measure the energy flows crossing the physical and balance

boundaries involved in the definition. On the other hand, the achievement of the zero

balance should also guarantee that Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) is provided.

In fact, the risk in Net ZEB is that IEQ requirements are sacrificed in order to reduce

energy consumption. Therefore, two sets of parameters have to be monitored for the

verification of the Net Zero Energy target, i.e.(i) the energy flows occurring from, to

and within the building and (ii) a range of IEQ indicators aimed at verifying the net

zero balance and comfort conditions in the building.

The IEQ monitoring is based on existing standards for indoor thermal environmental

like the ASHRAE Standard 55-2013 [7] , the EN ISO 7730:2005 [8] , the EN

15251:2007 [9] , or the ASHRAE Standard 189.1:2014 [10] .

The present monitoring protocol has been already implemented within the above

mentioned project in various Net ZEB around the world.

2.4.2 Characteristics The present monitoring protocol applies the whole building monitoring approach.

Three phases, i.e. planning, installation, and operation of the monitoring system, are

involved in the process. They will be defined in the following sub-section. Within the

protocol, the following steps are particularly relevant for the assessment of Net ZEB:

Collection of building data;

Definition of monitoring boundaries;

Selection of metrics and relevant data required;

Selection of data frequency and duration of measurements;

Identification of suitable sensors and data acquisition system;



Page 34 of 60

Final planning of the monitoring equipment and installation;

Definition and implementation of data post-processing (e.g. performance

indicators);

Definition of a standard reporting.

The monitoring boundaries depend on the physical and balance boundaries set in the

Net ZEB definition. Generally, the core element of a definition is the weighted

balance between exported and delivered energy, therefore, the focus is on the

interface between the building and the grids. Also, the metrics useful to check the

balance referred to the flow entering and exiting the building boundaries, has to be

included in the monitoring. The accuracy, frequency, and the duration (spot, short or

long measurements) of the measurements depend, among other factors, on the type

of parameters to be measured and on the additional analysis to be carried out (e.g.

improvement of system performance, IEQ assessment). The duration of monitoring is

a relevant parameter to be taken into account, given its association with weather

conditions and seasonality. To have a clear idea of Net ZEB performance and

possible malfunctioning, it is recommended to monitor for at least two years.

Depending on the information needed and the associated requirements and

acceptable cost, sensors and data acquisition system can be identified.

Concerning the data collection, as above mentioned two sets of parameters needs to

be monitored, i.e. energy flows for the building energy balance and IEQ parameters.

Among balance calculations for the energy flows monitoring, two main types are

commonly used:

Load/generation: typically performed during the design phase, more complex

for monitoring.

Imported/exported: more common during field monitoring, depends if all

energy uses are included in considered Net ZEB definition.

Furthermore, based on the considered Net ZEB definition, the balance must be

calculated on primary energy or carbon emission equivalents. Also the frequency of

data recording and the indexes to be evaluated depend on the definition. Different

applicable measurement durations to monitoring are as follows:



Page 35 of 60

Spot measurements: very short duration. Useful for constant metrics or to

detect instantaneous conditions. Can be repeated to gather information of

trend over time.

Short-time measurements: short duration, e.g. weeks. For both sub-metering

and whole building approach to provide information about time-dependent

behaviors.

Long-time measurements: spanning for more than a year. Useful to assess

metrics influenced by weather variations, user behaviors or operating

conditions.

A wide variety of sensors is available for the measurement of energy flows, which are

selected depending on the specific case study characteristics, budget, and expected

results. The metering technologies usually used for the monitoring of energy flows

within a building are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. Common sensors for the measurements of energy flows in buildings [6]

Type of meter Technique Electricity Electronic meters

Electromechanical induction meters Gas Positive displacement flowmeters: diaphragm or bellows meters

Coriolis flowmeters Thermal mass flowmeters

Solid flow Conveyor based methods Free fall solid measurement Detectors of the level of solids in tanks (radar, microwaves, acoustic sensors)

Liquid flow Electromagnetic flowmeters Ultrasonic flowmeters Vortex-shedding flowmeters Differential pressure (obstruction-type) meters: orifice plate, Venturi tube, flow nozzle and Dall flow tube, Pitot static tube Turbine meters

Heating and cooling Liquid flowmeters Temperature sensors: - Thermoelectric effect sensors (thermocouple) - Varying resistance devices: resistance thermometers,

thermistors

Instead, IEQ monitoring is aimed at verifying that acceptable level of comfort has not

been sacrificed in order to reduce energy consumption. Additionally, these

measurements are needed for adjustment purposes to be able to compare



Page 36 of 60

consumption with the design values and detect malfunctioning. The accuracy of IEQ

monitoring depends on the specific goals (e.g. alignment process, control and

optimized operation of indoor environmental quality and comfort) and the budget

available. Selecting few relevant parameters allows to equip a greater number of

points, while more parameters provides a more detailed image. Table 4 shows an

overview of possible monitoring levels.

Table 4. Different monitoring levels with associated IEQ parameters [6]

Level 1 - Basic Monitoring

Level 2 - Advanced Basic Monitoring

Level 3 - Detailed Monitoring

Level 4 - Advanced Detailed Monitoring

- Indoor air temperature

- Outdoor air temperature

- Global irradiation

Level 1 plus: - Indoor humidity - Operative

temperature

Level 2 plus: - Indoor air velocity - CO2 concentration - Outdoor humidity

Level 3 plus: - Volatile organic

compounds (VOC) - Daylight factor/

Useful daylight index (UDI)

- Mean radiant temperature

- Global and diffuse solar radiation

- Wind speed and direction

Also, Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) questionnaires can be a useful tool to

assess IEQ when coupled with measurements.

After the data collection, the post-processing is used to investigate the fulfillment of

the balance as well as additional conditions and possible relationships among

variables. To compare the measured consumption with the design values the

alignment procedure is suggested to take into consideration indoor and outdoor

conditions different than assumed. Detailed analysis for thermal energy and

electricity should be performed to characterize performance and possibly implement

corrective measures. For thermal energy is common to present the dependency with

external variables, while for electricity the breakdown for different areas of the

building and/or the consumption distribution between lighting, technical equipment,

and plug loads. For comfort assessment, depending on whether the building is

conditioned or not different comfort assessment methods should be used. The most

commonly used are the ASHRAE comfort zones based on the psychrometric chart,

the adaptive comfort, and the Givoni comfort zones. Additionally, CO2 is often



Page 37 of 60

monitored. Finally, a standard report, including data analysis and data visualization,

must be prepared and disseminated.

2.4.3 Implementation and operation The procedure of implementation of the M&V protocol for Net ZEBs includes sixteen

different steps to be conducted grouped into three main phases, i.e. planning,

installation, and operation of the monitoring system. The different steps of

implementation of the protocol divided in the three phases are listed in Table 5-7.

The monitoring system planning involves firstly the set of monitoring goals, according

to the selected Net ZEB definition. Therefore, the energy flow measurements and the

balance boundaries have to be defined. Accordingly, the methodology for the

collection of measurements required to check the selected Net ZEB definition has to

be described. Also the monitoring boundaries are selected according to the definition.

Then, the data collection duration and frequency are defined, based on the balancing

period and on the overall duration used as reference for verifying that a building is

really Net Zero Energy. Additionally, different levels of metrics could be considered

based on the specific monitoring goals. The minimum required are the data needed

for the balance verification, including those needed for the climate adjustment. If any

relationship exists between the selected metrics, the dependent metrics can be

evaluated indirectly through this relationship, in order to reduce the number of

measurement points and thereby the monitoring effort/cost. Finally, each

measurement duration and accuracy and the proper equipment is identified based on

the metrics.

Afterwards, for the monitoring system installation phase the installation technical

feasibility has to be checked, which depends on the building project. Such technical

feasibility is dependent on the energy system layout compared to the project drafts. It

is necessary to check if the equipment selected can actually be installed in the

building on the basis of space availability for the sensor installation, their connection

with the electric panel, and distances to be covered among others. If eventual

technical unfeasibility results from the previous step, proper measures have to be

identified. Such step must also assess the impact on data accuracy due to the

implemented measures. Finally, all the hardware and software components of the

system must be set-up and tested, including meters and sensors calibration by

following primary standards.



Page 38 of 60

Although previous step aims at checking that the monitoring system works properly,

some failures can occur during the final operation phase. Therefore,

estimation/calculation approaches have to be identified to overcome possible lacks.

Moreover, to guarantee that the monitoring system works properly during its

operation, it is necessary to plan maintenance activities.

Once all measurements are collected and stored, data can be post-processed.

Based on the standardization of monitoring procedures, also a predefined post-

processing can be identified. A final report has to be developed, including building,

monitoring system, and metrics description and energy balance and control and

optimization mechanisms, comfort assessment results and discussion.

Table 5. Steps for the implementation of a M&V protocol for Net ZEBs in the planning phase [6]



Page 39 of 60

Table 6. Steps for the implementation of a M&V protocol for Net ZEBs in the installation phase [6]

Table 7. Steps for the implementation of a M&V protocol for Net ZEBs in the operation phase [6]

2.5 Comparative analysis of the existing M&V protocols The IPMVP defines standardized and internationally reliable monitoring procedures

mainly focusing on the quantification of energy, water or demand savings, resulting

from the implementation of ECMs. However, it mostly outlines the steps of general

project planning, management, and execution of the monitoring, without detailing

technical specifications and specific measures or technologies involved the M&V

process. In fact, the variable nature of monitoring projects realistically precludes a



Page 40 of 60

universal M&V protocol applicable to all situations. It has to be adapted to the

individual projects by addressing to the specific objectives.

Similarly, the ASHRAE Guideline 14 is an internationally widespread procedure, but

mainly focused on the description of detail indications on how to develop a M&V plan.

Therefore, the IPMVP and ASHRAE Guideline 14 are complementary documents

that provide guidance and instruction to those interested in quantifying the results

from energy savings projects. In fact, the two above mentioned monitoring protocols

differ by design in these key areas:

IPMVP is a framework of definitions and broad approaches whereas

ASHRAE Guideline 14 provides detail on implementing M&V plans with the

framework.

IPMVP makes a provision for limited metering under Option A whereas

ASHRAE requires metering for all options.

IPMVP discussions on balancing of Uncertainty and Cost are enhanced by

ASHRAE definition of ways to quantify uncertainty so that M&V design

decisions can consider costs in light of the best available methods for

quantifying uncertainty.

To the aim of the ZERO-PLUS project monitoring protocol, the general indications of

the IPMVP protocol will be taken into account for the general structure.

On the other hand, the M&V protocol developed for Net Zero Energy Buildings within

the Task 40/Annex 52-Towards Net Zero Energy Solar Buildings has been

specifically design to point out the main issues of monitoring Net ZEBs and to define

the required activities from the concept and design to the installation and exploitation

of the monitoring system. It allows the assessment of energy balance in Net ZEB,

mostly focusing on the actual building operation and not on its comparison with past

operations. Therefore, it defines a specific monitoring protocol suited to this particular

application. Since the ZERO-PLUS project has similar aims for the monitoring of NZE

settlements, the present protocol can be taken into account as example and

integrated in a process based on standardized monitoring indications.



Page 41 of 60

3. ZERO-PLUS Project monitoring protocol at settlement scale

The first step in developing a M&V procedure is the definition of its objectives. The

methodology used to gather, manage, and analyze measured data about energy use

and conditions in buildings largely depend on the purpose of the monitoring. The

main goal of the monitoring protocol implemented within the ZERO-PLUS project is

to assess the NZE settlements and innovative technologies actual performance and

efficiency, renewable energy production and savings, and to verify settlements end-

use with respect to the design expectations. Therefore, a standardized monitoring

protocol for energy and demand savings, i.e. the IPMVP, has been considered for the

general structure of the protocol while taking into account principles for Net ZEB

monitoring. The main technical characteristics of the adopted monitoring procedure

are described in the following sub-sections. Further details about the methodology

implemented, the baseline conditions, and the reporting period will be described

within a future task after the optimization of the ZERO-PLUS settlements design and

technologies.

3.1 General characteristics of the monitoring procedure The objectives of the proposed monitoring procedure at settlement level are:

to monitor the case studies and collect all energy and environmental data

regarding the performance of the four case study settlements;

to assess the performance of the involved systems and technologies and also

the global energy and environmental performance of the settlements;

to develop an optimized maintenance methodology for all systems and

techniques in order to achieve the best possible performance and cost

effective operation;

to perform a Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE), including analyses of the

actual interaction with users and analyses of barriers for its implementation

and acceptance;

to deeply analyze the results of the monitoring and generate proper technical

information for future feasibility analyses and design.



Page 42 of 60

The proposed monitoring architecture for the outdoor areas of the ZERO-PLUS case

study settlements is an open source Web-GIS platform. The platform is designed in

order to gather and share the collected measurements and different kind of internal

data (the last is out of the purposes of D4.2) and data at settlement level as

described in Section 3.2. To this aim, a real-time data monitoring for the four

settlements utilizing appropriate measurements and graphical visualization tools is

required.

Accordingly, all the parameters affecting the energy flows at settlement level and the

outdoor microclimate needs to be monitored. Therefore, a whole-facility approach

has to be used by assessing the effect of each innovative technology separately. The

selected IPMVP options are summarized in Figure 4. According to the M&V Plan

requirements (Section 2.1.1), the selected options of the IPMVP are C and D for the

predictive design assessment and the post-occupancy assessment, respectively.

Option D is considered in the design stage because the expected savings are

determined through simulation of the energy use and production in the whole

settlement. Nevertheless, the dynamic simulation performed in the design phase (i.e.

WPs 3, 4 and 5) is not yet calibrated, as it will be validated afterwards by means of

the monitoring results in WP7 (as described in IPMVP-option D).

Whereas, Option C is considered in the ex-post stage because continuous

measurements of the entire facility energy use are taken throughout the reporting

period. Measurements/data at settlement level are collected according to Section 3.2.

The final purpose of the measured data and related parameters and indicators

calculated during the data post-processing, i.e. cost indicators, carbon footprint, etc.,

is the assessment of actual project KPIs for each case study settlement.



Page 43 of 60

Figure 4. IPMVP Options implemented in the ZERO-PLUS project at design and ex-post stages

3.1.1 Definitions The following preliminary definition list represents the way each term is used in the

ZERO-PLUS Project monitoring protocol. A final definition table will be listed within a

future task after the optimization of the ZERO-PLUS settlements design and

technologies.



Page 44 of 60

Energy:(a) energy, demand, or water use; (b) capability of doing work. Energy can

take a number of forms, which may be transformed from one into another such as

thermal (heat), mechanical (work), electrical, and chemical. Customary measurement

units are kilowatts (kWs), British thermal units or kilojoules (Btus or kJ), quantity of

steam (in pounds or kilograms), or volume (in gallons or liters) of hydrocarbon fuel [2]

Energy Conservation/Efficiency Measure (ECM or EEM): the set of activities

designed to increase the energy efficiency of the zero energy settlements.

energy savings: reduction in use of energy from the pre-retrofit baseline to the post-

retrofit reporting period once independent variables, such as weather or occupancy,

have been adjusted for [2]

Regulated energy use: (otherwise known as the building load) energy consumption

for heating + cooling + domestic hot water + fans + pumps + ventilation.

Renewable energy (RE): energy production from building integrated (building level)

renewable energy systems and community systems (settlement level). To meet the

NZE goal the combined total must be ≥ 50kWh/m2 per year.

Total RE = building integrated RE + settlement level RE

Net regulated energy: it is equal to the regulated energy use – the total RE. To meet the NZE goal this must be ≤ 20 kWh/m2 per year.

Renewable energy system (RES): systems that produces energy from renewable

sources, e.g. solar radiation, wind, etc.

Conventional/Baseline building: the building as-designed by the

architect/developer, i.e. no Zero Plus project changes are applied, conforming to the

minimum energy requirements as set by the local regulations.

Zero Energy Reference Building: a building designed with conventional

technologies (e.g. conventional PVs) in order to achieve regulated energy

consumption of less than 70kWh/m2 per year and energy production by RES of at

least 50kwh/m2 per year. This building does not benefit from community

management systems, community RES, and advanced construction components.

Zero Plus building: a building that uses energy efficient technologies to reduce

energy consumption and achieves the target of producing RE of at least 50kwh/m2

per year by using building integrated RES plus:



Page 45 of 60

the energy produced by the community RES;

the energy reduction of using the advanced energy management systems;

the energy reduction from advanced building envelope components;

the energy reduction from improved microclimate.

Measurement: (a) the act of collecting data using an instrument or meter; (b) data

collected using an instrument or meter; (c) a calculated value that is derived directly

from measurements [2]

Measurement and verification (M&V): determination of actual energy, demand, and

water savings achieved by one or more energy conservation measure(s). Savings

cannot be directly measured because they represent the absence of energy use.

Instead, actual savings are determined by comparing measured use before and after

implementation of a project and making appropriate adjustments for changes in

conditions [2]

Measurement and verification plan (M&V plan): document describing in detail the

proposed M&V activities, procedures, and methods that will be used to determine the

actual energy savings [2]

Monitoring: gathering data over time to evaluate equipment or system

performance [2]

3.2 Monitored parameters at settlement level Selected parameters will be monitored at settlement level within WP7 in order to

assess the four case study settlements performance and all the information related

with the project objectives. The preparatory work for the design of the Web GIS

platform is listed in Annex I. The monitored parameters are listed in the following sub-

sections by distinguishing in energy-related parameters (3.2.1) and outdoor

microclimate parameters. However, the monitoring environment is required to

support the inclusion/exclusion of a set of measurements and parameters, in order to

customize the monitoring system according to each case study requirement. The

measured parameters, the number of monitoring points, and the position of

measurement stations will be designed according to each case study settlement

requirements and characteristics in WP7.



Page 46 of 60

3.2.1 Energy needs, savings, and generation monitoring The energy-related parameters that will be monitored at settlement level are:

Outdoor light consumption (kWh);

Total buildings Electric Energy consumption (kWh);

Total buildings Thermal Energy consumption (kWh);

Electric Energy Production of each Renewable Energy System (kWh);

Thermal Energy Production of each Renewable Energy System (kWh);

Total Electric Energy production of the settlement (kWh);

Total Thermal Energy production of the settlement (kWh).

3.2.2 Microclimate monitoring The microclimate parameters that will be monitored at settlement level are:

Outdoor dry-bulb Temperature (°C);

Outdoor surfaces Temperature* (°C);

Relative Humidity (%);

Wind speed(m/s) and direction** (°);

Global solar radiation over a horizontal plane (W/m2);

Global solar radiation over inclined planes (i.e. PV orientation) or other

strategic position(W/m2);

Solar reflectance (albedo) of surfaces (W/m2), related to the scenarios studied

in WP4

Cloudiness (%);

Illuminance level (lux), in order to support the assessment of the smart public

lighting system.

*The main relevant vertical and horizontal surfaces in the settlement outdoor areas

have to be monitored, i.e. paving, buildings vertical and horizontal surfaces, etc.



Page 47 of 60

**Wind speed and direction probes should be placed in close proximity to the place

where the WindRail system by ANERDGY will be installed and/or in specific positions

where dedicated wind models will be trained.

3.3 Monitoring system operation According to the project description in the Grant Agreement, the following main

criteria have to be considered for the data collection:

i. High resolution (five-minute to half-hourly) to identify variations in energy use.

ii. Co-incident analysis to correlate energy use events against environmental

performance (e.g. increased temperatures).

iii. Over a sufficiently long period of time, typically a season or one year, to

isolate seasonal or other effects.

iv. Remotely monitored data in web-based platforms.

Therefore, the monitoring system will be characterized by:

i. Measurements collected every 15 min. in general, with the possibility to

increase the resolution if required by the specific measurement parameter,

such as wind related parameters.

ii. Contemporary monitoring of energy and environmental parameters.

iii. At least one year of monitoring, i.e. M30-M42.

iv. Transmission of collected data to a Web-GIS platform.

The installed measuring equipment, sensors, and data-loggers will collect all the data

and transmit them to a web-based database, for data storing, processing, and

visualization as described in section 3.4.

Table 8 reports the required characteristics of the remotely monitoring system using

internet. Also, measuring devices integrated in the external Integrated Energy

Resources Management System by ABB should be considered for monitoring

purposes.

Table 8. Technical specifications of the data collection

Nr TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF THE DATA COLLECTION



Page 48 of 60

1 Sample rate 1 sec to 12 hours 2 Accuracy < 8 seconds per month in 0° to 40°C 3 Resolution 12-15 bits 4 Data format XML or CSV 5 Data Communication SOAP 6 Telecommunications Data logger firmware must support modem

telecommunications and have an IP connectivity. LAN connectivity should also be possible. Local backup of configuration parameters, data storage in case of communication failure.

7 Ethernet connector Ethernet 10 /100 BaseT (10/100 MBit) 8 Wi-Fi network standards IEEE 802.11b/g/n 9 Connectivity with the

measuring equipment ASHRAE BACnet/ ZigBee or KNX as alternative (to be decided in WP7)

10 Input / Output Ports Up to 16 analogue channels and 10 digital channels 11 Operating Temperatures -40°C to +50°C 12 Power Requirements 1. Operating voltage of min 5 -max 30 VDC. Nominal

Voltage 24 VDC and nominal current 300 mA. 2. During power interruptions, the data logger must maintain correct time and date references and resume logging when power returns to normal operational levels.

13 Surge protection - Transient Voltage and current

1. The data logger must withstand repeated power transients. 2. Equipment must not be affected by transient voltage and current originating from the power supply or other sources.

14 Programming Interface, Firmware and Software

1. All interaction with the data logger programs must be possible manual and using a PC (upload and download of parameter set-up sensor management, data acquisition and retrieval, firmware upgrade) 2. The data logger must revert to previously stored configuration if abnormal exit from configuration routines occurs.

15 Sensor management 1. Data Logging: a. Log data with date and time stamp. b. Logging frequency programmable from 1 per sec to 1 per 12h. 2. Ability to turn log on and off. 3. Capability of logging a minimum of 11 distinct parameters.

16 Data storage The data logger must have a minimum of 100 days data storage for: 1. Twelve (12) environmental parameters logged every 15 min. 2. All of above complete with date and time stamp and data labels. 3. There must be a warning about potential memory erasure/data loss if user actions could result in such an occurrence.



Page 49 of 60

4. Data overwrite when memory is full must be user selectable.

17 Battery life 4 years

3.4 Web-GIS platform The monitoring of the Zero Plus settlements will be implemented through an open

source Web GIS platform. The platform will support the monitoring procedure of the

four settlements of the project. The Web-GIS platform model will gather and share

the collected measurements and data from the four case studies. In this way, the

settlements performance and all information related with the project’s objectives and

KPI’s be managed and interpreted.

The data providers are the four different case study settlements in which several data

loggers will be installed. The recorded data will be sent in a central storage system. It

is proposed not to use a server in each settlement but cloud computing. As a result,

the selected monitoring data from each settlement will be stored in a web cloud and

will be transmitted through TCP/IP connectivity. Furthermore, additional data will be

imported which will be calculated based on the recorded measurements or previous

developed models, for example the PMV factor and the project’s KPI’s. A total

estimation of 100 GB with 4 CPUs is considered a reliable basis on which the web

cloud storage and processing system can be started. In any case, all cloud providers

enable the upgrading of a cloud server, if the total storage capacity is reached, with

respect to the additional cost.

The architecture of the web based monitoring platform for the ZERO-PLUS

settlements is presented in Figure 5.



Page 50 of 60

Figure 5. Architecture of a Web based GIS system

In the service layer also other data files will be inserted such as spatial data files and

3D building drawings, in order to form the final visualization. One option is to use the

Tomcat Web server, Geoserver, PostGIS, and Hadoop to perform these tasks [11]

GeoServer is an open source software server written in Java that allows users to

share and edit geospatial data. It is freely available for download and available for the

Windows, Linux, and MacOS platforms [12] In the front end of the Web-GIS

monitoring platform, the Geoserver can provide high level spatial SQL interface to the

end user to query the data and create images.GeoServer can easily use PostGIS for

Web Map Service. Designed for interoperability, it publishes data from any major

spatial data source using open standards [13]. Two potential representations of the

Web based GIS platform are depicted in Figure 6 and Figure 7.



Page 51 of 60

Figure 6. Screen shot (hypothetical) of the Web-GIS, dashboard/maps and 3D visualization

Figure 7. Screen shot (hypothetical) of the Web-GIS, 3D visualization



Page 52 of 60

4. Description of the four ZERO-PLUS case study settlements

This section concerns the preliminary description of the technical details of each case

study settlement, which information is propaedeutic for the monitoring plan design

that will be carried out in D7.1.

4.1 Peyia Village, Paphos, Cyprus - Total land area: 254940 m2.

- Total n° of buildings: a rehabilitation center (about 6000 m2), 123 individual

houses up to 300 m2 (total surface 26000 m2), and a 9-apartment buildings

containing 110 suites.

- Total ZERO-PLUS settlement surface: about 2000 m2.

- Buildings in ZERO-PLUS project: 2 autonomous plots with individual

residential luxury villas. Buildings surface:

Villa type Building 1 Building 2

Enclosed Spaces 270m² 160m² Covered Parking 35m² 35m²

Covered Verandas 55m² 20m² Total Area 360m² 215m²

- Open spaces in ZERO-PLUS project: green area around the two villas (Figure

8).

- Indoor monitoring: to be detailed in WP3 and WP7.

- Outdoor monitoring: to be detailed in WP7, after the optimization stage where

the specific technologies will be properly selected, positioned, and sized.

- Renewable energy systems (before the optimization stage to be carried out in

WP5 – on going):

(i) WindRail solar and wind driven energy system by ANERDGY;

(ii) FRESCO Solar LFC and TES tank or FAE HCPV by ARCA;

(iii) Integrated Energy Resources Management by ABB:



Page 53 of 60

1. SACE power management;

2. EcoDry distribution transformers;

3. PLM i-illumination system.

Figure 8. 3D render of the open spaces in the Cypriot settlement.

4.2 Granarolo dell’Emilia, Bologna, Italy

- Total land area: about 9600 m2.

- Total n° of buildings: the settlement construction involves two NZE residential

buildings and close surrounding.


- Buildings in ZERO-PLUS project: two single-family villas, representing a

typical Italian residential scheme, each one, characterized by a total floor area

of about 240 m2 distributed into an approximately rectangular ground sub-lot

of about 800 m2. The villas are designed to host one family of about three to

five people.

- Open spaces in ZERO-PLUS project: surrounding green area (Figure 9).



the specific technologies will be properly selected, positioned and sized.



Page 54 of 60


WP5 – on going):

(i) React (storage and inverter) by ABB;

(ii) WindRail solar and wind driven energy system by ANERDGY

(iii) PV panels.

Figure 9. 3D render of one of the buildings of the Italian settlement with surroundings.

4.3 Voreppe, Grenoble, France - Total land area: about 3000 m2.

- Total n° of buildings: a 18-collective dwellings building for social renting

(around 1400 m² inhabited area) and a 28-dwellings building for social selling.


- Buildings in ZERO-PLUS project: a 18-dwellings 5-floor rectangular building

for social renting.

- Open spaces in ZERO-PLUS project: shared parking lot and surrounding

green area (Figure 10).




Page 55 of 60




WP5 – on going):

(i) FRESCO Solar LFC and TES tank or FAE HCPV by ARCA.

Figure 10. 3D render of the open spaces in the French settlement

4.4 Derwenthorpe Community, York, UK - Total land area: 218500 m2.

- Total n° of buildings: 500 homes including 2, 3, 4, and 5 bedroom homes with

private garden and a number of 1 bedroom apartments.

- Buildings in ZERO-PLUS project: 3 detached residential single-family

dwellings with 3 bedrooms, split over 2 floors (floor surface 95 m2). Each

dwelling can host an average of three people, with a maximum of five people.

- Open spaces in ZERO-PLUS project: properties private gardens and part of

the adjacent open space (Figure 11).




Page 56 of 60




WP5 – on going):

(i) WindRail solar and wind driven energy system by ANERDGY;

(ii) FRESCO Solar LFC or FAE HCPV by ARCA;

(iii) Integrated Energy Resources Management by ABB:

1. SACE power management;

2. EcoDry distribution transformers;

3. PLM i-illumination system.

Figure 11. 3D view of the open spaces in the English settlement



Page 57 of 60

5. Conclusions and future developments The present deliverable D4.2 describes the general framework of the specific M&V

protocol to be used for the monitoring of the four NZE settlements outdoor areas and

of the performance of energy technologies implemented at settlement level.

In order to develop a reliable and effective monitoring protocol, a preliminary review

of existing internationally available M&V procedures has been carried out. In

particular, three monitoring protocols have been considered for implementation in the

ZERO-PLUS project. Firstly, the International Performance Measurement and

Verification Protocol (IPMVP), owned by the Efficiency Valuation Organization (EVO),

which is one of the most acknowledged worldwide. Secondly, the ASHRAE Guideline

14 on Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings is considered. And finally, a

M&V protocol specifically developed for Net ZEB within the IEA SHC/ECBCS Joint

Project Task 40/Annex 52 -Towards Net Zero Energy Solar Buildings is assessed.

The main objectives, technical and operational characteristics of the three protocols

have been listed. Moreover, the main requirements of a M&V Plan, which describe

the procedure to carry out the monitoring, have been reported.

Based on the analyzed monitoring protocols, the M&V procedure to be implemented

in the four ZERO-PLUS case study settlements has been developed. The proposed

monitoring architecture is a Web-GIS platform model, designed in order to gather and

share the collected measurements and data from all the four settlements. The

objectives of the proposed monitoring architecture at settlement level are

(i) to collect, store, and process all energy consumption/production and

environmental data monitored in the four case study settlements,

(ii) to assess the global energy and environmental performance of the

settlements and the specific performance of the renewable energy

production technologies and management systems, and

(iii) to show in a specifically designed user friendly interface in the platform

the related information in a front end, which will interact both with the user

and with the application server for the implementation of all processes.

The developed procedure, which will be detailed in WP7, is customized for

monitoring the four settlements with low operational cost, since it is based on open

source software tools and cloud computing. The GIS and various web technologies



Page 58 of 60

can be efficiently combined as a mechanism to share spatial information freely,

openly, and easily. Finally, there will be the potential of extending the Web GIS

platform by adding further settlements in the future. Also, a preliminary definition of

the M&V protocol specifically implemented in each case study settlement, including

the description of the used sensors, the measurement procedure adopted, and the

monitoring architecture layout, has been reported.

A more detailed description of the monitoring setup, system, and the Web-GIS

platform will be developed within WP7, as agreed in the project proposal. The

monitoring setup will be designed according to the protocols developed in WP3 and

WP4 for indoor and outdoor areas measurements, respectively. The technical setup

of the monitoring platform will be carried out in co-operation with the case studies

owners who will install the measuring devices, according to the supporting team and

the partnership guidelines.



Page 59 of 60

6. References [1] Efficiency Valuation Organization (EVO), International Performance Measurement &

Verification Protocol (IPMVP) - Concepts and Options for Determining Energy and Water Savings, Volume I, 2002.Available fromhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy02osti/31505.pdf

[2] ASHRAE Guideline 14-2014 (Supersedes ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002),Measurement of Energy, Demand, and Water Savings. Available from http://www.techstreet.com/products/1888937

[3] IEA SHC/ECBCS Joint Project Task 40/Annex 52 - Towards Net Zero Energy solar Buildings. Available fromhttp://task40.iea-shc.org/

[4] EVO, International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocol - Core Concepts, EVO 10000 – 1:2014.Available fromhttp://evo-world.org/en/

[5] ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002,Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings. Available fromhttps://gaia.lbl.gov/people/ryin/public/Ashrae_guideline14-2002_Measurement%20of%20Energy%20and%20Demand%20Saving%20.pdf

[6] IEA SHC/ECBCS Task 40/Annex 52 – Towards Net Zero Energy solar Buildings. M&V protocol for Net ZEB. A technical report of STA, 2013. Available from http://www.nachhaltigwirtschaften.at/iea_pdf/endbericht_201417_iea_shc_task40_ebc_annex_52_anhang03.pdf

[7] ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2013. Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy.

[8] EN ISO 7730:2005. Ergonomics of the Thermal Environment – Analytical Determination and Interpretation of Thermal Comfort Using Calculation of the PMV and PPD Indices and Local Thermal Comfort Criteria.

[9] EN 15251:2007. Indoor Environmental Input Parameters for Design and Assessment of Energy Performance of Buildings Addressing Indoor Air Quality, Thermal Environment, Lighting and Acoustics.

[10] ANSI/ASHRAE/IES/USGBC Standard 189.1-2014. Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings.

[11] D. Fustes, D. Cantorna, C. Dafonte, B. Arcay, A. Iglesias, and M. Manteiga, “A cloud-integrated web platform for marine monitoring using GIS and remote sensing. Application to oil spill detection through SAR images,” Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst., vol. 34, pp. 155–160, 2014.

[12] B. R. Larsen, “Geoserver as a tool for providing networked geospatial environmental data,” 2010.

[13] GeoServer. Available from http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/user/ [14] VPS Cloud. Available from https://www.ovh.com/us/vps/vps-cloud.xml



Page 60 of 60

Annex I Within WP7, TUC carried out the following preparatory work aimed at developing the

project monitoring protocol.

Investigation of the data types that need to be collected (as above

mentioned).

Investigation of the data storage environment: a web cloud [14] will be used

with 100 GB storage, 4 CPU and 8 GB RAM.

Investigation of the database management system: PostgreSQL data base

will be explored for the data storage and processing.

Investigation of the Web-GIS environment: Geoserver will be explored with

PostGIS extension for the image processing.

Investigation of the web server: Tomcat Apache will be explored.

Investigation of the security options in the data transmission and storage:

- HTPPS transfer protocol with SSL encryption and firewall in the cloud

server;

- maintenance and update of the services that need to be accessible,

such as PostgreSQL database or Geoserver;

- user control with password protected access to additional data of the

settlements;

- Investigation of the data processing for the forecasting algorithms

development: all necessary data will be selected through the database

and processed in Matlab, in the web cloud. The results will be stored

again within the database.

To this end TUC has set up a free software tool in a Linux operating system and

developed an initial test version of the Web based monitoring platform, in order to

assess the system effectiveness.

Documents

Achieving near Zero and Positive Energy Settlements in ...zeroplus.org/pdf/ZERO PLUS_D4.2.pdf · 6.0 30.06.2017 Updated Italian case study description in section 4.2 (new location