MNECBModel National Energy Code for Buildings (aka Model National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings 1997)
Copyright 1988-2018, All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
Table 1 lists the energy and cost savings of the project with respect to the MNECB.
These measures reduced the space heating requirements by almost 80% compared to the MNECB reference.
Space cooling is provided by a ground source heat pump system utilizing borehole technology, and the cooling is allocated to as-needed spaces via the radiant distribution system..Even with all of the high performance improvements, the MTL design was not able to meet the 70% annual energy savings compared to the MNECB equivalent, without the use of active renewable technologies.
Simulations using the tendered construction package indicate that the design will achieve the 70% improvement over the MNECB comparable reference case as per the design charter.
Modeling was performed with EE4 energy simulation software (using the DOE-2.1E simulation engine), which creates a reference building matching the 1997 MNECB. This process resulted in a building with conventional HVAC systems optimized for energy efficiency, pushing energy savings over 40% and allowing the LEED target to move from Silver to Gold.
Compared to an all-electric reference building designed according to MNECB (which would have a simulated energy consumption of 466 kWh/[m.sup.2] per year), these data show a reduction of 71.4% in annual specific energy consumption for the store (Table 1).
The software generates a reference model based on the MNECB (Model National Energy Code for Buildings).
However, while eQuest uses Standard 90.1, EE4 uses the Canadian Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB), a Canadian adaptation of Standard 90.1.
Table 2 shows an energy comparison between the average facilities presented in Table 1, the reference building as per the Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB) of Canada for a teaching facility including geothermal energy in the Province of Quebec (1) and in the Province of Ontario, (2) and the new Kahnawake Survival School.
Table 2 shows that KSS performs well at 66.8% more efficient than the average teaching facility in the Province of Quebec and 51.4% more efficient than the reference building of the MNECB of Canada for a teaching facility in Quebec using geothermal energy.
According to the Canadian Building Incentive Program (CBIP), a 62% energy reduction was evaluated for the building, in comparison with the MNECB 1997 (Model National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings).