Slide 1 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Presented to:

Session: Fenestration 2

Atlanta, Georgia April 2, 2012 Slide 1

Presented by:

Nick Bagatelos

Jesse Wolf Corsi Henson, AIA, LEED AP Saint-Gobain Solar, NA

BIPV FAÇADES RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Slide 2 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

BACKGROUND

Photo credit: Bagatelos Architectural Glass Systems Inc.

Slide 3 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

BACKGROUND

American Institute of Architects & Architecture 2030 Challenge

Net Zero Buildings by 2030

Goal applies to new & existing buildings

Relying on effective combination: • Energy efficiency • On-site renewable energy generation

Slide 4 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

BACKGROUND

Selling price for PV modules is approaching $1/Wp = $10/SF - $14/SF (no incentives) = $7/SF - $10/SF (30% ITC) Typical cost for spandrel glazing = $12 - $14/SF BIPV Curtain Wall Premium - 100% payback in 24-36 months

Slide 5 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

RESEARCH QUESTION

How effective are BIPV spandrel applications in generating on-site energy across a variety of climate types and latitudes so that buildings can approach net zero annual energy consumption? The vertical wall will generate 72% of the rooftop array.

Slide 6 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

HOT-ARID Phoenix, AZ Latitude: 33°26’N

HOT-HUMID Miami, FL Latitude: 25°48’N

TEMPERATE New York, NY Latitude: 40°47’N

COOL Minneapolis, MN Latitude: 44°53’N

kWh/m2/day

5 to 6 4 to 5 3 to 4

KEY

PARAMETERS: CLIMATE ARID Sacramento, CA Latitude: 38°34’N

Slide 7 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

PARAMETERS: WHOLE BUILDING

Highly energy efficient building = 70% more efficient than similar buildings for location 70% energy reduction target matches the Architecture 2030 Challenge goal for 2015

Target Rating: 100 (70% energy reduction target)

Space Type: Office Floor Plate: 20,000 SF Stories :10

Maximize BIPV effects by application on highly energy efficient buildings

Slide 8 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

PARAMETERS:

Impact to Potential PV Area: • Proportion of South façade area to East/West façade area (L/W Ratio) • Proportion of Vision Glazing (no PV) to Spandrel (PV)

Slide 9 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

PARAMETERS: L/W RATIO VARIATION

Slide 10 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

PARAMETERS: FAÇADE VARIATION

Results compare least vs. greatest % coverage

Slide 11 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

COMPARISON OF ROOF vs. FACADE

SPANDREL: potential for significant surface area (w/ solar access)

Slide 12 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

RESULTS: PV PERFORMANCE

ANNUAL ENERGY DENSITY COMPARISON

0.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

20.0

24.0

MIA(25°48'N)

PHX (33°26'N)

SMF(38.5°N)

NYC(40°47'N)

MNN(44°53'N)

kWh

/ SF

/ YR

OPT° TILT 15° TILT 90° TILT

Comparison: Energy Generation Intensity (EGI) kWh / SF / YR

Slide 13 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

RESULTS: PV PERFORMANCE

kWh/SF/YR %PHX (33°26'N) 13.47SMF (38.5°N) 12.21 9.3%MNN (44°53'N) 11.67 13.4%NYC (40°47'N) 10.70 20.5%MIA (25°48'N) 9.74 27.7%

Energy Generation Intensity (EGI) 90° tilt, South facing

Highest

Lowest

Slide 14 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

RESULTS: WHOLE BUILDING

(kWh/SF/YR)MIA (25°48'N) 5.50PHX (33°26'N) 5.53SMF (38.5°N) 4.71NYC (40°47'N) 4.78MNN (44°53'N) 5.05

Energy Use Intensity (EUI)

Results of Target Finder Study

Highest

Lowest

Slide 15 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

PV GENERATION (kWh/YR)

BLDG CONSUMPTION (kWh/YR)

RESULTS: WHOLE BUILDING

SMF (38.5°N)

697 783

244 159

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000SMF (38.5°N)

844

97

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

25%

ROOF

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000 SMF (38.5°N)

596717

345224

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000 SMF (38.5°N)

519667

423275

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000 SMF (38.5°N)

454624

488317

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000

1:1 L/W RATIO

1:2 L/W RATIO

1:3 L/W RATIO

1:4 L/W RATIO

L/W RATIO COMPARISON FOR SACRAMENTO

62.5 kW

5,000 SF

250 kW

19,976 SF

162 kW

12,984 SF

353 kW

28,250 SF

230 kW

18,363 SF

433 kW

34,600 SF

281 kW

22,490 SF

500 kW

39,952 SF

325 kW

25,968 SF

ROOF

65% SPANDREL WITH HIGH L/W RATIO EXCEEDS 100% SPANDREL

Slide 16 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

SMF (38.5°N)

454624

488317

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000 NYC (40°47'N)

529679

428278

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000 MNN (44°53'N)

543706

466303

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000 PHX (33°26'N)

568756

538350

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000 MIA (25°48'N)

710846

389253

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

100% 65%

SPANDREL

(kW

h/YR

)

x 1000

COMPARISON ACROSS CLIMATE ZONES FOR L/W RATIO 1:4

RESULTS: WHOLE BUILDING

Highest PV generation

PV GENERATION (kWh/YR)

BLDG CONSUMPTION (kWh/YR)

Highest PV contribution

Slide 17 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

LOWEST TOTAL ELECTRIC CONSUMPTION W/ NO PVkWh/ YR % HIGHER

SMF (38.5°N) 941,436NYC (40°47'N) 956,891 1.6%MNN (44°53'N) 1,009,393 7.2%MIA (25°48'N) 1,099,097 16.7%PHX (33°26'N) 1,106,057 17.5%

LOWEST TOTAL ELECTRIC CONSUMPTION W/ PVkWh/ YR % HIGHER

SMF (38.5°N) 453,515NYC (40°47'N) 529,368 16.7%MNN (44°53'N) 543,269 19.8%PHX (33°26'N) 568,014 25.2%MIA (25°48'N) 709,862 56.5%

RESULTS: WHOLE BUILDING

Lowest Total Electric Consumption W/ No PV

Lowest Total Electric Consumption W/ PV

Highest

Lowest

Highest

Lowest

BIPV contributions can SIGNIFICANTLY lower electric consumption

Slide 18 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

• Relying on available roof mounted PV systems for tall buildings will not provide as significant on-site renewable energy.

• While current research reveals the energy production limits associated with their vertical application; the net zero energy goal suggests a reconsideration of BIPV facades.

• Spandrel applications can contribute in excess of 15% annual electricity needs for highly efficient office buildings throughout major US climate zones.

Slide 19 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

Slide 20 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

Good SOLAR ACCESS park

Slide 21 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

view from south east

Slide 22 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Shadow study: DECEMBER 21 @ 8:00 AM

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

SE FAÇADE WINTER: Shading 1st to 4th floor

Slide 23 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Shadow study: MARCH 21 @ 8:00 AM

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

SE FAÇADE SPRING: Shading 1st to 2nd floor

Slide 24 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Shadow study: JUNE 21 @ 8:00 AM

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

SE FAÇADE SUMMER: No Shading

Slide 25 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Shadow study: DECEMBER 21 @ 4:00 PM

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

SW FAÇADE WINTER: Shading 1st to 5th floor

Slide 26 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Shadow study: MARCH 21 @ 4:00 PM

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

SW FAÇADE SPRING: No Shading

Slide 27 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Shadow study: JUNE 21 @ 4:00 PM

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

SW FAÇADE SUMMER: No Shading

Slide 28 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

SMF TEST BUILDINGSOUTHWEST

FAÇADESOUTHEAST

FAÇADENO PV EUI (kWh/SF/yr) 4.71

FLOOR PLATE 13,680NET

CONSUMP (kWh/YR)

CONSUMP (kWh/YR)

TOTAL PV GEN

(kWh/YR)

PV COVERAGE

PV GEN (kWh/YR)

PV COVERAGE

PV GEN (kWh/YR)

FAÇADE LENGTH 114 120PV EGI (kWh/SF/yr) 11.33 11.53

STORY 12 38,311 64,394 26,083 75% 12,597 75% 13,48711 38,311 64,394 26,083 75% 12,597 75% 13,48710 38,311 64,394 26,083 75% 12,597 75% 13,4879 38,311 64,394 26,083 75% 12,597 75% 13,4878 38,311 64,394 26,083 75% 12,597 75% 13,4877 38,311 64,394 26,083 75% 12,597 75% 13,4876 38,311 64,394 26,083 75% 12,597 75% 13,4875 50,908 64,394 13,487 0% 0 75% 13,4874 64,394 64,394 0 0% 0 0% 03 64,394 64,394 0 0% 0 0% 02 64,394 64,394 0 0% 0 0% 01 64,394 64,394 0 0% 0 0% 0

TOTAL 500,039 643,942 143,903PV OFFSET (%) 22.3%

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

Slide 29 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

NET CONSUMP (kWh/YR)

78%

TOTAL PV GEN

(kWh/YR)22%

SACRAMENTO: EXAMPLE BUILDING

Spandrel applications can contribute in excess of 22% annual electricity needs for highly efficient office buildings.

Slide 30 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

Slide 31 BIPV FAÇADE RECONSIDERED: MID-RISE AND HIGH RISE APPLICATIONS

END Thank you for your attention!

Presented by:

Nick Bagatelos emial: nick@BISEM-USA.com For:

Jesse Wolf Corsi Henson, AIA, LEED AP email: jesse.w.henson@saint-gobain.com