Climate Resilience Feasibility Study of Facilities at ... Health Final Report 10... · CLIMATE...

Climate Resilience Feasibility Study of

Facilities at Fraser Canyon Hospital

Michal Bartko and Iain Macdonald

A1-010678.2

29 September 2017

Climate Resilience Feasibility Study of

Buildings at Fraser Canyon Hospital

Author

Michal Bartko, Ph.D. Research Officer

Approved

Trevor Nightingale, P.D.

Program Leader, High Performance Buildings, NRC Construction

Report No: A1-010678.2

Report Date: 29 September 2017

Contract No: A1-010678

Agreement date: 16 December 2016

Program: High Performance Buildings

26 pages

Copy no. 1 of 4

This report may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of the National

Research Council Canada and the Client.

CLIMATE RESILIENCE FEASIBILITY STUDY OF FACILITIES AT FRASER CANYON HOSPITAL

Final Report A1-010678.2 iii

Table of Contents

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. v

List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. v

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. vii

2. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

2.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 2

2.2 Fraser Canyon Hospital, Hope ............................................................................................. 2

3. Site Visit and Analysis ............................................................................................................ 3

4. Weather Data Analysis ........................................................................................................... 5

4.1 Future Weather Predictions .................................................................................................. 8

4.2 Analysis of on-site sensor recorded data .............................................................................12

5. Variables with the Highest Impact on Energy Efficiency ........................................................15

6. Building Models .....................................................................................................................15

6.1 Analysed Cases ..................................................................................................................17

6.2 Results of Simulations .........................................................................................................17

6.2.1 Acute and Lodge Buildings ...........................................................................................17

6.2.1.1 Cooling Energy Consumption .................................................................................17

6.2.1.1 Cooling Coil Capacity .............................................................................................19

6.2.2 Lodge Addition Building ................................................................................................20

6.2.2.1 Cooling Energy Consumption .................................................................................20

7. Scenario Evaluation ..............................................................................................................22

8. Energy Performance Evaluation Tool ....................................................................................23

9. Summary and Discussion ......................................................................................................23

Appendix A: Buildings of Fraser Canyon Hospital

Appendix B: Summary of the Model Inputs

Appendix C: Building Envelope Retrofit Scenarios


Final Report A1-010678.2 iv


Final Report A1-010678.2 v

List of Figures

Figure 1. Examples of Infrared (IR) photos used for building envelope analysis ......................... 4

Figure 2. Example of data logger placement for longitudinal measurement of temperature and

relative humidity .................................................................................................................. 5

Figure 3. Summer outdoor air temperatures (2009 to 2011)…………………………………….…..6

Figure 4. Summer outdoor air temperatures (2012 to 2014)…………….…………………….…….7

Figure 5. Summer outdoor air temperatures (2015 and 2016)……………………………….……...8

Figure 6. Summer outdoor air temperatures for 2016, and predictions for 2020 ........................10

Figure 7. Summer outdoor air temperatures predictions for 2050 ..............................................11

Figure 8. Comparison of average Monthly (June to September inclusive) outdoor temperatures

for 2016, and predicted values for 2020 and 2050 .............................................................11

Figure 9. Outdoor and indoor temperature runs, example June 2017…………………………… 12

Figure 10. Outdoor and indoor relative humidity runs, example June 2017……….. …………… 12

Figure 11. Thermal Comfort Conditions by ASHRAE……………………………………………… 13

Figure 12. Geometrical model of Acute and Lodge buildings .....................................................16

Figure 13. Geometrical model of Lodge Addition building .........................................................16

Figure 14. Cooling energy consumption for the Acute and Lodge buildings for two occupancy

conditions: (i) Standard , and; (ii) Worst case scenario for (June to September inclusive) of

2016 and that predicted for 2020 and 2050 ....................... Error! Bookmark not defined.18

Figure 15.Total Cooling Energy Consumption for Acute and Lodge Buildings…………………. 19

Figure 16. Cooling coil capacity: Acute and Lodge Buildings .....................................................19

Figure 17. Future predictions of indoor temperature above set point temperatures ...................20

Figure 18. Cooling energy consumption for the Lodge Addition building for two occupancy

conditions: (i) Standard , and; (ii) Worst case for (June to September inclusive) of 2016

and that predicted for 2020 and 2050. ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.21

Figure 19. Cooling coil capacities for various retrofit scenarios…………………………...……… 22

Figure 20. Future predictions for HVAC system demand…………………………………………..25

List of Tables

Table 1. Matrix of simulation instances .....................................................................................17

Table 2. Cost estimates of retrofit options…………………………………………………………... 23


Final Report A1-010678.2 vi


Final Report A1-010678.2 vii

Executive Summary

In January 2017, Lower Mainland Facilities Management (LMFM) and the National Research

Council (NRC) launched an energy and climate resilience feasibility study. This study focused

on the Fraser Canyon Hospital (FCH) in Hope, BC. The FCH study was intended to help inform

how the FCH facility may be retrofitted and how new facilities may be designed, to reduce risks

and increase resilience in the context of B.C.'s climate change reality. Specifically, the project

will contribute to FH’s work in assessing and developing resiliency plans for 50% of their core

sites by 2020 and 100% by 2025.

This final report provides a summary of work and reports on findings from five activities:

Site visit to the Fraser Canyon Hospital (FCH) to interview operations staff,

administrators, and conduct a review of building energy systems to help inform whole

building performance models;

FCH performance assessment (ability to maintain acceptable indoor environmental

conditions) for current and future weather conditions using whole building performance

models;

Retrofit scenario evaluation;

Analysis of indoor temperature and relative humidity (RH) data recorded by sensors

installed during the site visit;

Development of a simple software tool to enable evaluation of alternative energy

efficiency measures and to explore which measures have the greatest potential for

energy reduction/savings and GHG reduction.

Key findings from the study include:

FCH operations and administration staff report elevated temperatures in the building

during events of extreme heat. Operations staff reported that the HVAC system was

operating at full capacity most daytime hours during the summer.

Maximum recorded indoor temperature did not exceed 24°C between January 26th and

June 26th 2017.

Thermal bridging as well as air leakage apparently was occurring in susceptible places

such as wall-floor and wall-roof connections and at window locations within the walls.

Several retrofit options were numerically evaluated for the FCH facilities. The most

desirable solution when considering energy efficiency, environmental impact, potential

emergency situations as well as retrofit costs included building envelope upgrades to

achieve greater thermal resistance and horizontal shading elements above windows;

additionally, these upgrades permitted attaining grater levels of climate resiliency.


Final Report A1-010678.2 viii

Climate analysis:

Weather projections for years 2020 and 2050 were made using a commercial tool. The

annual maximum temperature was predicted to increase from 36°C in 2016 to 40°C in

2020 and 44°C in 2050.

The number of days in a year when the ambient temperature exceeds 30°C is predicted

to increase from 9 days in 2016, to 23 days in 2020, and to 36 days in 2050.

Therefore the risk of extreme heat impacting FCH delivery of medical services will

increase unless mitigation measures are implemented.

Whole building performance analysis:

Base-building loads due to heat loss/gain through the envelope are the dominant load

for the HVAC system.

In the future the HVAC system will have insufficient capacity to respond to the predicted

increased severity of extreme heat events. Simulations for the future years (2050)

showed there would be a 50% increase in cooling load and that cooling coil capacity

would have to increase by 30% to offset this increased load.

As a result, without effective mitigation it is reasonable to expect the number of events

when the thermal comfort is not maintained will increase with time.

Modeling results and thermal imaging highlighted the need to consider envelope

upgrades as a mitigation measure. Increases in capacity and efficiency of the HVAC

system are also required.

Indoor temperature and Relative Humidity (RH) data analysis:

Indoor temperatures and RH in 15 locations in all three FHC facilities were monitored

between February and June 2017. During this period several days with higher than

normal external temperatures were recorded by the Hope Airport weather station.

Corresponding indoor temperatures increased to max 24°C and RH to max 60%. Both

variables were within or at the limit of standard thermal comfort requirements.

Retrofit scenarios evaluation:

Six options were evaluated. Out of the six options, retrofitting the building envelope to

increase the thermal resistance to R35 for walls and R50 for roofs, in combination with

horizontal shading of windows to control solar gain represents the most feasible option

considering economical, and energy performance criteria.

Simplified energy efficiency evaluation tool:

A simple stand-alone web-based tool was developed to evaluate energy performance of

the model considering future weather predictions for the years 2020 and 2050.


Final Report A1-010678.2 1

Climate Resilience Feasibility Study of Buildings at Fraser Canyon Hospital

by

Michal Bartko, PhD and Iain Macdonald, PhD

1. Introduction

In spring 2016, lower mainland facilities management (LMFM) conducted high-level climate

resilience assessments on five Fraser Health (FH) and Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH) acute

care facilities. Based on discussions with on-site staff, operational strains due to

extreme weather events were identified. Extreme heat was identified as particularly problematic

in 2009 and 2015.

With projected increases in frequency and severity of extreme heat events, LMFM explored with

Health Canada (Climate Change and Innovation Bureau) and the National Research Council

(NRC) options for in-depth technical analyses to gauge how current buildings and assets may

respond to future extreme heat events and how to minimise operational impacts caused by

elevated temperatures in these facilities.

In January 2017, LMFM and NRC launched an energy and climate resilience feasibility

study. This study focused on the Fraser Canyon Hospital (FCH) in Hope BC. The FCH study is

intended to help inform how the FCH facility may be retrofitted, and how new facilities may be

designed, to reduce risks and increase resilience in the context of B.C.'s climate change reality.

This final report provides a summary of work and reports on findings from five activities:

Site visit to the Fraser Canyon Hospital (FCH) to interview operations and maintenance

staff, administrators, and conduct a review of building energy systems to help inform

whole building performance models;

FCH performance assessment (ability to maintain acceptable indoor environmental

conditions) for current and future weather conditions using whole building performance

models;

Analysis of indoor temperature and relative humidity (RH) data recorded by sensors

installed during the site visit;

Retrofit scenario evaluation;

Development of a simple software tool to evaluate alternative energy efficiencies of the

model by changes to the parameters with highest impact on energy consumption.

With care, the results presented here could be generalised and used to provide a very early

indication of risk for the Province’s portfolio of hospitals as well as to motivate further work to

fully assess the risk and develop a robust mitigation strategy through whole building energy

models informed by weather data projections as far out as 2050.



1.1 Methodology

Information on extreme heat and humidity events occurring during the 2009-2016 period,

including reports by facility and emergency management personnel on operational impacts, was

reviewed to develop a representative extreme event for model calibration. For this project an

extreme event is defined as one presenting an operational challenge that the site could not

respond to with resources readily available, within a reasonable timeframe. There are a number

of steps in this phase which are described below:

Problem definition — Key background information was reviewed to establish additional

information required for collection at the site.

Develop whole building model(s) — Scalable models were created to simulate the

building and its energy systems to obtain estimates of the environmental conditions in

the building just before, during, and just after the climatic event(s). The model(s) were

calibrated using weather data, energy data and BAS data.

Root cause determination — Calibrated model(s) were used to identify the root cause of

the impact (i.e., which energy systems were unable to effectively respond to the extreme

heat and humidity). Models were calibrated to the peak events between 2009 and 2016.

Scenario evaluation — The models were used to assess the effectiveness of various

mitigation options for high indoor temperature and high RH mitigation. Models consider

components of the complete HVAC system, envelope, etc. For each option a rough order

of magnitude cost is given. Each option was tested against the environmental extremes

in the period 2009 to 2016, and temperature and humidity extremes projected for 2050

with different intensities and durations. The 2050 weather projections are based on an

A2 scenario of Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) by Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

1.2 Fraser Canyon Hospital, Hope

The municipality of Hope, British Columbia with population of approximately 6000 is located at

the eastern end of Fraser Valley and southern end of Fraser Canyon. Local climate is humid all

year around averaging at 65%, with recorded extreme temperatures of +40.6°C in summer and

-25°C in winter.

The building complex at Fraser Canyon Hospital located in southern part of Hope consists of

three buildings:

1. Acute Care – Built in 1958 with parts added in 1990 this building is two storeys with

spaces for patient recovery, Operation Room, Labs and mechanical systems

2. Lodge – Built in 1990 this is primarily a long-term care facility for the elderly; and

3. Lodge Addition – Built in 2007 this provides expanded capacity for long-term care of the

elderly.

Photos of each of these buildings are provided in Appendix A.



2. Site Visit and Analysis

On January 26th 2017 a site visit was conducted. NRC met with the operations and

administration staff to learn how staff and patients were impacted by severe heat. NRC also

conducted an inspection and review of the building energy systems.

Interviews with the Administrator revealed that during extreme heat events there is the

perception that the temperature in the hospital does rise and may accelerate fatigue by medical

staff.

FCH operations staff provided the NRC team with a complete tour of all HVAC facilities in the

buildings and provided details of HVAC operation during extreme heat events. It was reported

that the “HVAC systems cannot keep-up” with the thermal loads during events which is

consistent with the reports from the Administrator of increased temperature in FCH. The tour

provided an opportunity to confirm equipment identified in previous energy audits, identify large

process loads (lab and kitchen equipment, etc.) and thus inform whole-building energy models

made by NRC.

In addition to the HVAC system review a thermal performance survey was conducted using an

Infrared (IR) camera; examples of IR photos used for the building envelope analysis are given in

Figure 1.

The analysis of the IR images, examples of which are given in Figure 1, showed that the Acute

building with concrete walls had a higher potential for thermal losses in and showed evidence of

thermal bridging. Thermal bridging at stud locations was also apparent for the exterior walls of

both Lodge buildings. Thermal bridges and air leakage occurs in susceptible places such as

wall-floor connections and at window through-wall penetrations. It is typically caused by

inadequate sealing at the perimeter of the components which leads to air leakage in cold

months.

In addition to the IR survey, 15 data loggers were deployed in various locations throughout all

three buildings. An example of a data logger location is shown in Figure 2. Data are presented

later in this report.



Figure 1. Examples of Infrared (IR) photos used for building envelope analysis.



Figure 2. Example of data logger placement for measurement of temperature and relative humidity.

3. Weather Data Analysis

An initial analysis of the Airport Hope weather station data for the period 2009 to 2016 was

conducted to identify periods when extreme heat events occurred. These periods were defined

as times when the ambient dry bulb temperature exceeded 30°C. The following periods were

identified:

2009: June 1st to 4th, July 27th to August 2nd 14 days 2010: July 7th to July 10th, August 12th to 17th 8 days 2011: August 21st, September 10th, 11th 3 days 2012: August 4th to 8th, August 15th to 18th 8 days 2013: June 29th to July 1st, July 15th and 16th, September 10th to 14th 6 days 2014: July 10th to 16th, July 28th to August 4th 8 days 2015: June 25th to July 9th, July 17th to 19th, July 29th to August 3rd 25 days 2016: August 18th to 26th 10 days

In general, for the period 2009 to 2016 a trend in the maximum ambient (outdoor) dry bulb

temperature increase was not observed. However, the number of days with critical temperatures

(duration of heat waves) increased from 1 to 4 days in 2009 and up to 3 to 6 days in 2016 with

an extreme example of 15 consecutive days of excess heat occurring in 2015.

After investigating daily peak temperature, the variation of temperature with time of day was

analysed. This analysis revealed that the average duration of outdoor ambient temperatures

above 30°C is 6 to 8 hours (rising between 11am and 1pm and decreasing between 5pm and

7pm). In a few extreme cases the duration was 10 hours.

Examples of summer outdoor air temperatures for years 2009 to 2011 are given in Figure 3,

2012 to 2014 in Figure 4 and for 2015 and 2016 in Figure 5.



Figure 3. Summer outdoor air temperatures (2009 to 2011).

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2009

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2010

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2011

3 days above 30°C

8 days above 30°C

14 days above 30°C



Figure 4. Summer outdoor air temperatures (2012 to 2014).

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2012

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2013

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2014

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2015

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2016

8 days above 30°C

6 days above 30°C

8 days above 30°C



Figure 5. Summer outdoor air temperatures (2015 and 2016).

Additionally, using data from weather station at the local airport obtained from Environment

Canada, weather analysis for summer 2017 was added. The maximum outdoor temperatures

exceeded 30°C in sixteen days:

2017: June 24th, August 1st to 4th , August 26th to 30th, September 2nd to 6th 16 days

3.1 Future Weather Predictions

Environment and Climate Change Canada is currently updating weather predictions for future

years as part of a comprehensive program on climate change. In the absence of these updated

weather predictions, data for this study were generated using a University of Southampton

study1 in which a weather morphing procedure was applied to the current weather data to

provide weather predictions for the years 2020 and 2050.

1 Mark F. Jentsch: Climate Change Weather File Generators, Technical reference manual for the

CCWeatherGen and CCWorldWeatherGen tools, Version 1.2, Univ. of Southampton.

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2012

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2013

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2014

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2015

0

10

20

30

40

de

g C

2016

25 days above 30°C

10 days above 30°C



The approach was based on Scenario A2 of the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios2

(SRES) utilized before year 2014, when it was superseded by the Representative Concentration

Pathways3 (RCP). In terms of the current evaluation methodology the SRES A2 scenario falls

slightly above the RCP6.0 scenario for the year 2100 for which CO2 emissions were predicted

as 800ppm (A2) and 730ppm (RCP6.0) respectively.

Figure 6 and Figure 7 show that the projected maximum temperature in the summer period will

increase from 36°C in 2016 to 40°C in 2020 and 44°C in 2050. Also the number of days above

30°C is projected to increase from 9 in the present model (2016) to 23 days in 2020 and 36

days in 2050. Summers are projected to have greater highs and there will be more days with

temperatures above 30°C.

A comparison of the average monthly outdoor temperatures for the months of June to

September, inclusive, in 2016 and predicted values for 2020 and 2050 for the same months is

provided in Figure 8. As can be seen, all projected values for monthly average temperature are

to rise in 2020 and again in 2050 in comparison to those of 2016.

2 Special Report on Emissions Scenarios, IPCC 2000, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0 521 80081 1

3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_Concentration_Pathways



Figure 6. Summer outdoor air temperatures for 2016, and predictions for 2020.

2016

2020

2050

9 days above 30°C

23 days above 30°C



Figure 7. Summer outdoor air temperatures predictions for 2050.

Figure 8. Comparison of average Monthly (June to September inclusive) outdoor

temperatures for 2016, and predicted values for 2020 and 2050.

2016

2020

2050

15.0 16.1

17.2

19.4 21.1

23.3

18.9

21.1

23.9

16.1 17.8

20.0

-

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

2016 2020 2050

Average Outdoor Temp, °Cjune july

august september

36 days above 30°C



3.2 Analysis of on-site sensor recorded data

Between January 26th 2017 and June 27th 2017 temperature and relative humidity data were

continually recorded every 15 minutes at 12 locations throughout the three buildings where care

staff work. On August 29th 2017 during the second site visit, the devices were retrieved for later

analysis of the data. (3 sensors were not found on deployed locations).

During the period of data logging, there was only one day (24th of June) when the outdoor

temperature was above 30°C at the local weather station at the Hope airport. Figure 9 shows an

example of the corresponding indoor air temperature for the fourth week of June 2017 for the

sensor placed in a patient room with south east orientation, at the Level 1 of the Acute Care

building.

Figure 9. Outdoor and indoor temperature runs, example June 2017.

Figure 10. Outdoor and indoor relative humidity runs, example June 2017.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

21-Jun 22-Jun 23-Jun 24-Jun 25-Jun 26-Jun 27-Jun 28-Jun

Tem

pe

ratu

re, °

C

T out

T in

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

21-Jun 22-Jun 23-Jun 24-Jun 25-Jun 26-Jun 27-Jun 28-Jun

Re

lati

ve H

um

idit

y, %

RH out

RH in



The indoor temperature oscillations between 20.5 and 23.5°C were recorded, while outdoor

temperature varied between 8.3 and 31.5°C. The RH runs for the corresponding periods are

shown in Figure 10.

The above sensor data example represents the highest variations of all sensors. Analysis of

data recorded by remaining sensors in rooms with occupancy showed temperature variations

within 2°C ranging between 22 and 24°C. Relative humidity values varied between 30 to 60%.

Both Temperature and RH variations for all monitored locations are within the range of thermal

comfort requirements by ASHRAE 55 standard (discussed below).

3.3 Predicted Thermal Comfort

In this study thermal comfort was predicted using the methodology defined in ASHRAE

Standard 554 with estimates of temperature and relative humidity obtained from energy model5

predictions specific to the FCH.

Thermal comfort is a highly individual factor affected by numerous factors: metabolic rate,

clothing insulation, air temperature & radiant temperature (combined for operative temperature),

air speed and relative humidity. Depending on relative humidity levels, the operative

temperature can vary between 21.5 and 28°C with natural air exchange (0.1m/s air speed). The

RH levels should be in the range 20 to 60%. The thermal comfort conditions as defined by

ASHRAE are presented in Figure 11.

4 ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55: Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy (2013).

5 ASHRAE 90.1: Energy Standard for Buildings (Hospitals Template).



Figure 11. Thermal Comfort Conditions by ASHRAE.



4. Variables with the Highest Impact on Energy Efficiency

The total thermal load of a building is the sum of base-building loads (required to offset heat

transfer though the building envelope and are typically defined by HVAC loads) and process

loads (associated with equipment associated with the business or activities within the building).

Often for non-industrial buildings, base-building loads associated with heath flow through the

building envelope are more important than process loads. This is the case for the FCH (as

shown in Figure 14 where increasing occupancy by 100% (impacting mostly process loads)

results in a change of about 15% in total building load).

Walls and roofs are often designed to prescriptive thermal resistance values in code. For the

climate zone in which the FCH is located would require: R20 for walls and R30 for roofs,

according to the NECB 2015. The air leakage impact can also be significant. Air leakage

however is highly dependent on air barrier design details and the quality of workmanship during

construction stage. As such, it is very difficult to model. The value of air flow change rate per

hour for occupied spaces was considered 2.0; relatively large value, typical of the vintage of the

FCH buildings. HVAC efficiency, shading and building occupancy play also important role in

evaluating overall energy efficiency of buildings.

5. Building Models

The FCH buildings were modelled using OpenStudio6: a collection of software tools to support

building energy modelling. The OpenStudio uses the US-Department of Energy (DOE)

developed EnergyPlus7 simulation program. EnergyPlus is widely recognised in North America

as the most effective and flexible platform for modelling whole building performance.

EnergyPlus enables coupled heat and mass transfer modelling for hourly or sub-hourly time

steps; allowing for integrated, simultaneous solution of conditions in thermal zones and HVAC

systems response. The software is capable of modelling radiant and convective heat effects that

affect surface temperatures, thermal comfort as well as condensation calculations.

Figure 12 shows a representation for the energy model for the Acute and Lodge buildings and in

Figure 13 for the Lodge Addition building. The models were refined after an initial presentation

and the geometry and space allocation was updated in agreement with information provided by

the client.

6 https://www.openstudio.net/ 7 https://energyplus.net/

https://www.openstudio.net/

https://energyplus.net/



Figure 12. Geometrical model of Acute and Lodge buildings.

Figure 13. Geometrical model of Lodge Addition building.



5.1 Analysed Cases

Multiple simulations were undertaken to examine the effect of climate change and as well,

changes to occupancy patterns as may be required when considering extreme events. For

example, during extreme heat events there is typically an increase in hospital admissions

(process loads will increase). In this project, the worst case scenario was defined as a doubling

of hospital occupancy.

As shown in Table 1 many different simulations were required to investigate the possible

weather and occupancy scenarios.

Table 1. Matrix of simulation instances

5.2 Results of Simulations

For each simulation case, the monthly building energy consumption “Cooling energy

consumption” and the HVAC size “Cooling coil capacity” required to maintain thermal comfort

was extracted from the simulation results. The results for the Acute and Lodge Buildings are first

provided followed by those for the Lodge Addition Building.

5.2.1 Acute and Lodge Buildings

5.2.1.1 Cooling Energy Consumption

The results derived from the simulation for cooling energy consumption for the standard and

increased occupancy conditions are given in Figure 14 and Figure 15.

Model Weather file (epw) Occupation

Acute and Lodge Buildings

Standard, presentStandard

Worst case

2020 Morphed (Southampton)

Standard

Worst case


Standard

Worst case

Lodge Addition Building

Standard, presentStandard

Worst case


Standard

Worst case


Standard

Worst case



Figure 14. Cooling energy consumption for the Acute and Lodge buildings for two

occupancy conditions: (i) Standard , and; (ii) Worst case scenario for

(June to September inclusive) of 2016 and that predicted for 2020 and 2050.

The simulation models show that with 100% increased occupancy as a worst case during

extreme events there would be a 15% increase in cooling energy consumption over the four

summer months (comparing the upper figure to the lower). Considering future climate conditions

(for both normal and increased occupancy) the worst case occupancy scenario would increase

in energy consumption by ~40%.

Results suggest that cooling loads of the building are not dominated by process loads which

would scale with occupancy, but that the dominant loads associated to the base-building loads

are the thermal loads through the envelope. This would suggest the need to consider envelope

upgrades as a potential mitigation measure.

Standard Occupancy

44.3 47.2

51.6 57.1

63.0

70.3

58.0 63.3

69.8

48.1 51.6

57.4

-

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

2016 2020 2050

Cooling loads, MWhjune july

august september

50.4 53.9

58.9

65.6

72.4

80.9

66.8 72.7

80.0

55.1 58.9

65.9

-

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

2016 2020 2050


august september

Worst Case Occupancy



Figure 15.Total Cooling Energy Consumption for Acute and Lodge Buildings

5.2.1.1 Cooling Coil Capacity

The design cooling coil size is the capacity of the HVAC cooling coil required to maintain the

building at a constant design temperature. By comparing the cooling coil capacity needed to

respond to various scenarios against the current design it is possible to assess the risk of the

building to have elevated temperatures beyond design for thermal comfort.

As can be seen in Figure 16, the current capacity of the cooling coil is represented by the left

hand blue column (standard occupancy). The increased higher occupancy demand and future

demand (2050) with increased number of extreme days would require an increase in cooling

capacity (approx. 32%) to maintain current conditions.

Figure 16. Cooling coil capacity: Acute and Lodge Buildings.

207.5225.1

249.1238.0

257.9

285.7

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2016 2020 2050

Total cooling loads, MWh

Std Occ

+100% Occ

434

501500

577

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Standard Worst Case

Occupancy

Cooling Coil Capacity, kW

2016

2050



Similar conclusion can be drawn from data in Figure 17 where the current cooling unit would not

be capable of providing required cooling capacity to adequately condition the interior spaces

when the building is subjected to increased climatic loads expected in the future.

The increase in the number of hours with indoor air temperatures above the thermostat set point

(taken to be 21°C in the models) does not seem affected to a great extent by increased

occupancy, but mainly by the increased number of warmer days and the extended duration of

heat waves between now and 2050. Again this points to base-building loads as being dominant.

Figure 17. Future predictions of indoor air temperature above set point temperatures.

5.2.2 Lodge Addition Building

5.2.2.1 Cooling Energy Consumption

The results derived from the simulation for the Lodge Addition building in respect to cooling

loads for the standard condition for 100% increased (worst case scenario) occupancy are given

in Figure 18.

For the Lodge Addition, simulation models showed with the worst case occupancy during

extreme events, there is a 20% increase in cooling energy consumption over the four summer

months (comparing the upper figure to the lower one). Considering future climate conditions (for

both normal and increased occupancy in year 2050) the increase in energy consumption is

~50%.

0 0.2

9.8

16.8

54.757.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Standard Worst Case

Occupancy

Hours with Temperatures above Setpoint

2016

2020

2050



Figure 18. Cooling energy consumption for the Lodge Addition building for two

occupancy conditions: (i) Standard , and; (ii) Worst case for

(June to September inclusive) of 2016 and that predicted for 2020 and 2050.

Standard Occupancy

9.7 10.6

11.7 13.2

14.7 16.4

13.2 14.7

16.1

10.8 11.7

13.2

-

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

2016 2020 2050

Cooling loads, MWhjune

july

august

september

Worst Case Occupancy

12.0 12.9

14.7 16.4

18.2

20.2

16.7 18.2

20.2

13.5 14.4

16.4

-

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

2016 2020 2050


august september



6. Scenario Evaluation

Six retrofit options were evaluated:

1. Original building envelope remains and a new chiller with a capacity to cover for 2050

predictions is installed.

2. Option 1 plus adding horizontal shading above all windows facing east, south and west

3. Retrofit building envelope components (roofs & walls) to levels reasonably achievable

with today’s technology (R-35 wall; R-50 roof).

4. Option 3 plus adding horizontal shading above all windows facing east, south and west

5. High performance insulation (R-50 wall; R-70 roof) applied to the envelope components

of newly built building.

6. Option 5 plus adding horizontal shading above all windows facing east, south and west.

Retrofit options for the building envelope are summarized in Appendix C.

As presented in Figure 19 for 2050 weather conditions, increasing the envelope R- value and

additional shading should help decrease the cooling loads. There are a number of intermediate

cases. Also shown in the figure is the 2016 baseline cooling load.

Table 2 presents class E estimates of costs for each retrofit option for Acute and Lodge

buildings and separately for the Lodge Addition building.

Considering energy performance as well as the cost estimation, Option 4 - the combination of

building envelope improvement with horizontal overhang shading of windows facing east, south

and west should be given serious consideration. It is worth noting the insignificant difference

between Options 4 (wall and roof upgrades) and 6 (new wall roof constructions) including

shadings suggesting there are many pathways to achieve a target performance level.

Figure 19. Cooling coil capacities for various retrofit scenarios.

434

500

479

437

413

431

408

300

350

400

450

500

550

Cooling coil Capacity, kW

2016

1) Orig Env

2) Orig + Shade

3) Retrofit

4) Retrofit + Shade

5) High Perf Insul

6) HP Insul + Shade



Table 2: Cost estimates of retrofit options

Retrofit option Acute & Lodge Lodge Addition

1) Orig Env, New chiller $240k $150k

2) Orig + Shade $410k $240k

3) Retrofit $2.525M $615k

4) Retrofit + Shade $2.695M $705k

5) New HP Insul. (Including original building demolition)

$20.500M $4.350M

6) HPI + Shade. (Including original building demolition)

$20.670M $4.440M

Note: Ductwork not included in the estimate

7. Energy Performance Evaluation Tool

A simplified tool to evaluate alterations in model energy performance of Acute and Lodge

building was created and is provided as a stand-alone web based tool.

The most significant parameters affecting building energy performance and summer thermal

comfort were incorporated in the tool. Namely, the value of thermal resistance of the building

envelope: R values of walls (R20, R35 and R50) and roofs (R30, R50 and R70), U value (U0.35,

U0.25 and U0.15) of windows, solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC 0.6 and SHGC 0.3) of

windows; degree of horizontal shading of windows (0 shading and 0.5 shading, representing the

horizontal projection of 0.5 times the window height) and efficiency- coefficient of performance

(COP 3 and COP 5) of cooling units of mechanical systems. The option whereby the tool would

account for an increase in facility occupancy during heat events was also included (20%

occupancy increase), as well as the choice of future weather predictions for the years 2020 and

2050.

The output provided from use of the tool includes: consumption of cooling energy for summer

months (June to September) and the number of hours when the indoor temperature increased

above a set-point 21°C. The hours are stated for a thermal zone with the highest number of

hours above the set point (an office on a west wing of Level 2 of the Acute care building).

8. Summary and Discussion

Key findings and observations include:

8.1 Site visit:

FCH operations staff and Administration report elevated temperatures in the building

during events of extreme heat. Operations staff report that HVAC system is operating at

full capacity for most of the summer.



Analysis of the IR images showed that the Acute care building having concrete walls had

higher potential for thermal losses in the wall as well as occurrence of thermal bridges.

Thermal bridging at stud wall locations is also apparent for both Lodge buildings.

Thermal bridging as well as air leakage is apparently occurring in susceptible places

such as the wall-floor and wall-roof connections and as well at windows locations within

the wall.

8.2 Climate analysis:

The local climate analysis was carried out in two steps. In the first step the Environment

Canada hourly climate data were analyzed to determine the occurrence and durations of

extreme weather events between 2009 and 2016. Maximum temperatures did not

increase over the period, however the duration of heat waves increased from 1 to 4 days

in 2009 and up to 3 to 6 days in 2016; an extreme example is that of a 15 day heat wave

in 2015.

In the second step, projections for years 2020 and 2050 were made using a future

morphed climatic data generator: the maximum temperature increased from 36°C in

2016

o to 40°C in 2020 and

o to 44°C in 2050.

The number of days in a year when the ambient temperature exceeds 30ºC is predicted

to increase from 9 days in 2016, to 23 days in 2020, and to 36 days in 2050.

The risk of extreme heat impacting FCH delivery of medical services will increase unless

mitigation measures are implemented.

8.3 Whole building performance analysis:

Base-building loads due to thermal energy through the envelope are the dominant load

for the HVAC system. In comparison the cooling required to offset process loads is small

(medical instrumentation, kitchen activities, etc.); this requirement should scale with

occupancy devices.

In the future the HVAC system will have insufficient capacity to respond to the predicted

increase in severity of extreme heat events; this is illustrated in Figure 20 in which is

shown the future predictions for HVAC system cooling capacity and demand over time.

Simulations for future years (2050) showed a 50% increase in cooling loads and cooling

coil capacity would have to increase by 30%.

The number of hours when the thermal comfort is not maintained is predicted to increase

to 57 hours in 2050 during summer months.

Modeling results and thermal imaging highlight the need to consider envelope upgrades

as the primary mitigation measure. HVAC system capacity and efficiency upgrades are

secondary mitigation measures.

Building envelope upgrades in combination with horizontal overhang shading of windows

facing east, south and west are believed to represent the most appropriate retrofit option

before updating the HVAC system.



Figure 20. Future predictions for HVAC system demand.

Note: Number of heat events represents the number of days with external temperature increase

above 30°C (based on Figures 6 and 7)

This report has shown that severity of extreme heat events experienced by FCH facility will

increase as time passes. It is expected that the maximum exterior temperature will increase, as

will the frequency and duration of these events. While this study focussed on FCH there is

cause to believe that these trends will also be experienced at other locations in BC and in other

provinces in Canada. As noted in the report Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC)

is updating weather data for the whole of Canada.

Given the statements above, it is tempting to generalise the results and findings of this project.

Extreme care should be given in the extrapolation of the findings and of applying the

accompanying prediction model to circumstances that are different than those found at FCH.

The model which was based on input data specific to the FCH building showed that base

building loads – those from space conditioning to offset external thermal and solar loads – were

dominant compared to process loads – those due to delivery of hospital services. This may not

be the case in all hospitals with the relative importance being determined a number of factors

many of which can be varied in the interface to the models supplied with this report. What

cannot be varied is the geometry of the building, namely its footprint, height, and orientation, as

well as the window to wall ratio. These are key parameters in determining exterior thermal

loads so the model cannot be applied to other buildings with different geometries.

A more complete assessment of the risk due to extreme heat events and to provide guidance on

mitigation and policy measures that could be implemented as mitigation across BC, would

require a larger, more comprehensive study that would include archetype medical buildings

representative of the complete medical building stock in BC.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2016 2020 2050

Nu

mb

er

of

he

at e

ven

ts

kW

Cooling Capacity (kW) Cooling Demand (kW)

Capacity Shortfall (kW) Thermal Discomfort (Events)



In advance of a such study, it is likely safe to say that if a building is struggling to maintain

adequate environmental conditions in the building, the situation will get worse with time; a long

term plan extending to 2050 or beyond needs to be developed for the rehabilitation of buildings

to respond to the thermal loads which are expected to become more severe. This should not be

interpreted as overdesign of the HVAC system so there is capacity for the future as this will lead

to inefficiencies in the near and mid-term. But rather it means the plan must have stages where

performance upgrades are linked to planned maintenance and equipment replacement periods

so as to reduce the total cost of ownership. As noted above, a comprehensive approach is

required when rehabilitating a building portfolio.



Appendix A: Buildings of Fraser Canyon Hospital

Acute Building

Lodge Building

Lodge Addition Building



Appendix B: Summary of the Model Inputs

Outdoor environmental conditions

- Hourly Hope Airport weather station data

Modelled indoor air set points

- Air temperature 21°C

- RH 30%

HVAC System

- Air Loop with Electrical DX Cooling Coil and Gas Fired Heating Coil with Outdoor Air

exchange System.

- Parallel Gas Reheat Unit for each thermal zone

- HRV (Heat recovery system) non employed

Building Envelope Assemblies

- Acute and Lodge Model

Wall assembly (Acute building), R 7

• Concrete wall 150mm

• XPS 50mm

• Gypsum board 12.7mm

Roof assembly (Acute building) R 12

• Modified asphalt membrane

• Thermal insulation, wood-base board 100mm

• Steel metal deck

• Ceiling board 12.7mm

Wall assembly (Lodge building) R 17

• Stucco

• Sheathing membrane

• OSB 11mm

• Stud wall with glass fiber insulation 150mm

• PE vapour barrier 6mil




Roof assembly (Lodge building) R 27

• Asphalt shingles

• OSB 11mm

• Attic air space

• Thermal insulation, cellulose fibre 250mm

• OSB 11mm

• Ceiling air space 300mm


- Lodge Addition Model

Wall assembly, R 17

• Vinyl siding


• OSB 11mm


• PE vapour barrier 6mil


Roof assembly, R 27

• Asphalt shingles

• OSB 11mm

• Attic air space

• Thermal insulation, cellulose fibre 250mm

• OSB 11mm

• Ceiling air space 300mm




Appendix C: Building Envelope Retrofit Scenarios

Retrofit Building Envelope Assemblies

- Acute building, Wall assembly, R 35

• EIFS (Stucco + thermal insulation 120mm)

• Concrete wall 150mm

• XPS 50mm


- Lodge and Lodge Addition Building, R 35

• Vinyl siding

• Furring strips (air gap 40mm)

• Thermal Insulation 75mm


• OSB 11mm


• PE vapour barrier 0.15mm


- Very High Performance Insulation Wall assemblies:

• EIFS on solid masonry and/or double-stud walls

Climate Resilience Feasibility Study of Facilities at ... Health Final Report 10... · CLIMATE...

Documents

Transcript of Climate Resilience Feasibility Study of Facilities at ... Health Final Report 10... · CLIMATE...