We talked a lot about hospital facility engineers and I wondered how many we had on the line (there weren't any in my breakout room). How might we bring these important stakeholders into this conversation?
What specific insight/topic from 'The First R: Reduce' workshop do you want to explore more?
Where am I?
In decarb:HEALTHCARE you can ask and answer questions and share your experience with others!
A more detailed discussion on the advantages and limitation of using building energy modeling to assess Healthcare buildings, reduce loads and energy, and inform life cycle cost analysis.
Travis referenced the dogmatic nature of current ventilation requirements. We need to question the intuitive assumption that more ventilation = better IAQ.
There is emerging data and empirical evidence that draws counter-intuitive conclusions about how ventilation/ACH rates harm or help IAQ.
Current ventilation standards are a punt from an era where energy impacts were an afterthought, if at all. Consider the importance of carbon impact and how we would establish ventilation standards if we were to do it today.
Rethinking ventilation standards based on data-driven conclusions is an opportunity to minimize simultaneous heating and cooling challenges (in both new and existing buildings) that plague Healthcare, much less the entire building stock.
Natural ventilation. Facility engineers (of someone in my group) "nailed" operable windows shut, when it got through every other hurdle (design engineer, owner, codes, etc.). How did it make facility engineer's experience more difficult? How can we solve this last mile problem?
Presentation of a case study of a successful project that actually successfully reduced reheat loads. In my group discussion was shared that energy modeling is not a tool that is accurate and actual building performance is never as promised during design. How to design with more accuracy and have a reliable outcome / use?