Every day I glance at the myriads of e-mails, blogs and information I get on my reader in anticipation of something revolutionary that will tip the scales and make everyone get on board the energy conservation movement. I anxiously await new announcements by HUD, RESNET, Energy Star, The Enterprise Foundation, USGBC and other organizations dedicated to creating the new mousetrap in building.  Each day I keep reading basically the same stuff over and over again, with new words, but very few new ideas. I get reminded of the lines in the “Right Stuff” stating we are not saying anything new here, but the same things over and over again, only with a lot of technical mumbo jumbo.  I get disgusted as we continue to inundate consumers, builders, developers and government with information that lacks a common sense approach, combined with economic realities.

I have to reach deep and question, at times,  my commitment to this industry.  I have believed in energy efficiency in building since coming home from Europe and the Middle East in the 70′s and seeing 1^st hand what fuel shortages and dramatic increases in the cost of oil products can do to an economy.  I saw the mass panic that fuel shortages caused in the United States in the late 70′s and it wasn’t pretty.  I get myself pretty down, reflecting on this issue, carried over from my youthful exuberance.  I still believe in it, but unfortunately I believe in common sense and reality more.  I want to see this stuff accepted by all because it makes sense-economic and common.

Over the past few years I have been involved with a wonderful program called EarthCraft Virginia.  I was attracted to it because of its common sense approach and its ready adaptation to builders of single and multi-family housing.  It has been a great program to watch progress.  I am still the believer that all the building dreams in the world have to be accomplished by two groups, Builders and Developers, without them there are no sticks or bricks.

My specialty is affordable housing in both single and multi-family housing.  I have watched dramatic energy conservation results take place by paying attention to the building blocks of energy efficiency, meaning you do the basics first and then, as economics dictate, you can apply other applications that have some justification.  When I say the basics I mean the thermal envelope and the HVAC systems.  You got to get them right, or everything else is just throwing money away.  There is such a thing as the “law of diminishing returns,” which very few “Green Dreamers” ever bring into the conversation.

It is that law that explains a segment of the market place that I have seen grow disproportionately during the past few years in regards to affordable housing and that is the dramatic economic advantages afforded non-profit’s in contrast to for-profits.  What most building scientists, green guru’s, and consumers don’t grasp is that for-profit builders must economically justify every stick, brick and system in what-ever they are building and insure those items can contribute to the bottom line called profit.  No profit, no builder, no buildings and no jobs.

Non-Profits building affordable housing have a distinct advantage.  That advantage is called grants, subsidies and cheaper money programs.  I love non-profits and what they do by building in economically disadvantaged locations.  Most of my clients are non-profits.  More so in the past few years than at any time previously.  I love the ones that want to learn about doing it right.  Several come to mind, but this isn’t about promotion this is about reality.

For profit builders and developers have had it harsh over the past few years.  They get looked down upon constantly by “Green Guru’s” because they don’t incorporate the latest evolving technology into their products.   You know why?  It is called “Economics 101.”  If home owners, apartment owners and renters shop their pocket book, the for-profit builder-developer can’t afford to throw in expensive systems as a gift.  I mean when was the last time your grocery store gave you a free shopping cart full of food because you shopped there the past year or they wanted you as a new customer?

I lose my passion from time to time and think many times I have become a negative person in constantly finding faults with the “Newest Daily Green Building” approach.  I question myself for not jumping on the hype of the newest and best “Green Technology,” but then I thank God I have some common sense or as one of my favorite quotes says, “Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment.”– Barry LePatner.  Thank Goodness I have Good judgment and making a somewhat arrogant statement, I can be a realistic, boots-on- the-ground voice in the well intentioned mix of unrealistic do-gooders.

In keeping within that common sense approach, I am lucky that every week something sets me off and makes me realize I continually look at Green Building from a builder or for-profit entity’s economic perspective.  This is in spite of the fact that I am an Engineer by education and should be looking at it without economics involved. Yeah right.

A particular quote set me off on this blog: It happen to come from a groundbreaking for Solar-on-the-Mall in Washington, DC.  Solar on the Mall is a great event.  The event is phenomenal for pushing the envelope of sustainable building and alternative energy options albeit not with economic justification in mind. The Quote:

“The house is an extension of the progression that Habitat has made over the last several years,” Kent Adcock, president and CEO of Habitat for Humanity of Washington, D.C., said at the ground-breaking ceremony on June 29. “A number of years ago Habitat built with conventional construction, and then a few years after that we went to Energy Star construction. And then a few years after that we went a little further to EarthCraft certification.” Building to Passive House standards, he added, “is the next sustainable answer for affordable housing.”

I advise more than a few Habitat for Humanity Chapters on building with energy efficiency and sustainablility__what most call Green Building.  The DC Habitat chapter is a great entity and does great things, how can it not, it currently builds to the common sense, practical EarthCraft Standard, but for its CEO to make the statement that building to Passive House standards is the next sustainable answer for affordable housing is as out there as it gets.  Without grants, government subsidies and specialty programs, no creator of affordable housing can build to these standards.  It doesn’t make economic sense.

With all American Government in a crunch for money, scouring for money sources, how can affordable housing providers, developers and builders meet these standards and fill the astronomical void in affordable housing creation in this country economically. Not with Passive House! Speaking economically it will be a challenge for builders to implement the new Energy Star 3.0 standards, let alone the German Passif House standard for affordable housing construction.

Yes, it is nice to dream.  Yes, Passive House is a great concept, in certain situations, but to hail it as the one building specification that affordable housing providers should strive towards is la, la land.  In order to fill the Affordable Housing void in this country, practical energy efficient building implementations are the order of the day, not over priced standards that definitely feed the “Law of Diminishing Returns.”  We need to keep in mind another axiom of the practical building science, emphasized by my Guru, Chuck Bowles of EarthCraft VA and the esteemed, irreverent, great Joe Lstiburek of Building Science Corporation, “Build Tight and Ventilate Right,” with an added emphasis on common sense and economic justification, not “pie in the sky” grasping.

See Joe Lstiburek’s article in The ASHRAE Journal, May 2011, “Just Right and Airtight”, for some more common sense information.

“FHA AND FANNIE MAE ANNOUNCE GREEN REFINANCE PLUS TO PAY FOR ENERGY-EFFICIENT UPGRADES IN AFFORDABLE APARTMENT BUILDINGS”

Yesterday HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan introduced a program called “Green Refinance Plus”  targeting the refinancing of Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects.  This program’s focus is on energy conservation renovation, a major operational expense, for building owners and/or their tenants-occupants and offers a refinance option, that in this era of tight mortgage money, is a big, big issue.

One Common Sense inclusion was a statement that “Property owners will be able to select the energy- efficiency upgrades that make the most economic sense for their properties.”  Government sponsored programs have been know to arm twist property owners into making decisions that aren’t economically feasible, in exchange for financing, while limiting rents that can be paid, creating a cash flow nightmare for property owners.  One of the reasons projects opt out of the LIHTC program after the mandatory period.

It mentions a “Green Physical Needs Assessment” to be completed by a qualified provider.  Here comes the sticky wicket, “Who qualifies to be a Provider?”  In this world of Green Experts, many may state they are qualified, but are they?  What will be the determining factor of qualifying providers?  There are many starry eyed, Green Experts out there who have no knowledge of cost or practicality in application, and even less knowledge of building.   Without some common sense the goals of the program may never be obtained, to the detriment of affordable housing, families and Redevelopment Agencies.

One can only hope that the goal of having this assessment identify property improvements that  “reduce energy and operating costs” while giving the borrowers choices for the greatest energy savings for their investment actually is what is implemented and results.

Don’t get me wrong.  I believe this is a fantastic move on behalf of the government.  I work with LIHTC projects daily. I believe in them.  I believe affordable housing options in the this country are sorely overlooked, while being absolutely necessary. Everyone can’t afford a White Picket Fence, 2 kids, a lawn and a house.

There is one thing that this initial program announcement does not mention.  One mandatory item missing in most program announcements or grant awards, the education of the occupant and owner.  You can put in the greatest, most energy efficient, sustainable building items, but they are only as good as the people who use them daily.  I see some of the most practical applications implemented in Affordable Housing and yet occupants continue to move a thermostat up and down; continue to run AC with doors open; try to keep a house at temperatures exceeding 80 degrees in the winter and the main reason is–”They just don’t know any better.”  We can continue to give grants, subsidies, free money and make great improvements, but the greatest improvement may be in the education of people living and working in energy efficient, healthy, Green houses and buildings.

About 3  years ago we completed a 3 Bedroom Modular Home certified to Energy Star–EarthCraft House Virginia Standards for an Inner City Affordable Housing(CHODO) program.

We were interested to see what kind of energy it used relative to a home built strictly to the “Building Code.” In other words would it use less energy? To accomplish this for the first year of occupancy we paid the owner $100/month for original copies of their energy bills.  If the home used less than a $100/month they made money, if more, the $100 supplemented the bill.  We were expecting energy bills in the neighborhood of $50-60/month, with a spike above $100.00 in Air Conditioning Season.

Without getting into boring details, the house didn’t use less energy, it used more. Personally I was flabbergasted.  My theory of building was disproved.  As a HERS rater, engineer, builder I was out to prove this was the only way to build “Affordable Housing.” What had we done wrong?

Nothing!  That’s right, we had done nothing wrong in trying to construct an energy efficient, affordable, modular home within a strict budget.  What we hadn’t figured on was the occupants.

The home owners were a military family.  They were originally from a very warm environment.  They liked a warm house in winter, and a cold house in summer.  They pushed the heat pump high in the winter, forcing the back up strip heat to engage, and spin the old electric meter.  In the summer they cranked that dial down into the 60′s.

Now another factor kicked in.  The family had 2 young children and a third one born shortly after moving in.  That meant lots of loads of wash.  This meant lots of electric hot water and dryer usage.  You factor in all of those issues and the electric usage was way above projections.

For me it proved a point that all affordable housing providers, including for-profit, non-profit and government agencies should be doing after they build these homes: Secure the monthly utility bills.  It should be mandatory in any type of project using grants or government funds helping to build a project to an energy efficiency standard.  It should be mandatory for any homeowner/renter receiving subsidies or grants or any type of financial help to allow them to afford living there.

Why? We need feedback and documentation to see where the rubber meets the road between projections and reality.  We need it to educate the occupants using some good old fashioned common sense.

The recent posting on BuildingGreen called:”Net-Zero Does Not Live by Design Alone: The Human Factor”by Paula Melton gives a realistic viewpoint regarding the creating of Zero Energy Buildings(ZEB) and how people, occupants, are the wild card between the projections and the reality.  This posting makes a lot of common sense, something sorely lacking in the majority of Never-Never Land projections.  It should be read by anyone working on a Zero Energy Building Concept.

http://www.buildinggreen.com/live/index.cfm/2011/5/27/NetZero-Does-Not-Live-by-Design-Alone-The-Human-Factor

“Decrying the high cost of “optimization” of development in a lean time” Andres Duany, principal in the visionary firm of Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company(DPZ) and co-founder of the Congress for New Urbanism, “called for a return to commons sense development principals that harken back to the 19th Century and predicted declining use of the LEED standards for building efficiency.”

Mr. Duany was speaking at the “New Partners for Smart Growth” conference held in California. The article highlighted Mr. Duany’s comments regarding the “the excessive regulation of development and the high cost of certification of building under the U.S.Green Building Council’s LEED rating system.”

Amen!Amen!Amen! The key words above are “common sense.” One of the unfortunate effects concerning popular trends in the United States is the swing of the pendulum. When we get onto something, we throw common sense implementation right out the window in a rush to swing the pendulum 180 degrees in another direction. No creeping along for us. We want and we want it now.

The fact remains that many planning boards are staffed by over zealous, inexperienced, community activists and concerned “citizens,” who view builders and developers as rapers and plunderers of the earth. In trying to make up for perceived past flaws, the approving authorities haughtily feel these plunderers of the Earth need to be shown the proper path and to hell with the fact that they have to make a profit and people have to pay a higher prices for building and home construction.  It isn’t their money and they have the power. Much like religious fanatics they want 100% implementation today, not tomorrow and to hell with common sense.

What the majority of people forget is that without builders and developers there are no buildings. We would all still be living in caves without them. There would be no built environment. Keep that in mind, “No Builders, No Developers, No Buildings.” Keep in mind also, “No Money, No Profit, No Builders or Developers.” Even non-profit builders and developers have to make a profit or they to go out of business when the grants and specialty money dry up.

The reality of the situation is the more education we have, the more knowledge we gather, the more we lose touch with reality and common sense. Without common sense approaches we will see the vast majority of people in the United States turn there backs on the “Green_Sustainable Building” movement, much as they did in the 80′s. No matter how hard one tries, consumers still shop their wallet and if it doesn’t make economic sense, they can’t afford to do it. As the old saying goes, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them drink.” Common Sense has to rule the day. Sometimes as Duany states, “There are many low cost ways to get 85% of benefit of today’s standards,” and 85% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

It was strange, because the young man who made the statement, original involvement in the field was working for a small volume builder.  He had hands on experience, but like many in this evolving “Green” Sustainable, Energy Efficiency building movement, admitted that he is evolving into a building scientist geek.

What does that have to do with anything?  Who cares?  Well I care and so does the mass majority of people in the United States.   Why do I say the vast majority?   Without the vast majority of consumers buying into sustainability and efficiency efforts, the movement will remain at the fringe of society’s concerns.  Yes, it will continue to be embraced by Engineering, Architectural and Building Scientist Geeks speaking Geekese amongst themselves about the importance of what they are doing and why, but the good old average American, just living life, will go on as usual until emergencies force them to do something.  I don’t blame them.

What is the consumer to believe.  They are inundated with an overload of Green information on the web, the newspapers, TV, radio, etc.  There is so much technical information out there, that it takes people involved in the business hours daily to stay up.  Do any of us actually believe consumers are going to try and stay up with all this techno information?  Do any of us really believe that the consumer cares one iota if vapor contained in an air mass penetrates the exterior shell of a building?  Come on. They care about what the net result is to their life, their business,  or their budget, not the technical mumbo, jumbo or “Geekese.”

Green to most consumers, whether they be building owners, home owners, developers, business owners has to do with the biggest Green in the world–the Green dollar.  Most people, contrary to what may be said verbally, do not make a decision based on saving the planet.  They make a decision based on dollars.  Those dollars have to have a return on investment, usually shown in lower utility costs, lower tax rates, tax credits, lower operational and maintenance costs, longer longevity, and more residual value at the end of a time period.  If it doesn’t make economic sense, it isn’t going to get done.

Now maybe the Gates, Buffets, Pitts, Jobs, and DeCaprio’s of the world have the dollars to expend on saving the planet and taking it Green.  But the rest of us, we have to watch how we spend money and we aren’t into spending it foolishly.  Most of us are not interested in having bragging rights at a cocktail party filled with raised pinky martini drinkers over who has the best solar system.  We go to work, we provide, we come home and we live life.  We control what we can.  If someone can show us how to save energy, that will make it easier for us to cover our monthly expense nut, we can buy into that, but we aren’t buying into what happens 10 years from now, we have to live today.

If we don’t start explaining this sustainable effort in common sense, value terms, this avalanche of the Green movement, might just disappear, excepting that which is written into Building Codes, when this recession/depression ends.  If we don’t start explaining to people that commons sense sustainability and energy efficiency makes economic sense and they can see it in the results, our efforts will go the way of the energy revolution of the early 80′s.

The following is a revision based on an actual report concerning duct leakage in a multi-family Low Income Housing Tax Credit Renovation being done to EarthCraft Virginia Standards:

One of the areas of most concern is the return grill area being installed when the Air Handler is put in place.  At the same time as the return plenum is being installed, the return grill is being put in place, making it hard to see what is being sealed between this metal plenum and the framing surrounding it. 

The only unit I could see the installation of the return plenum without the grill in place was in building number 000, unit #12.  I am attaching a picture with this report.  As seen the sheet metal return is not sealed.  The other units where the air handlers were being installed already had the return grill in place.  In looking at it from the Air Handler closet side there appeared to be no sealant in place. 

In looking at the supply registers in the same buildings, where the registers had not been put in place, I could observe the sealing being applied.  Unit #6 in Building 0000 had, it appeared, an expanding white sealant applied in Breakfast/dining area and looked to be the best sealing method I observed. 

Here is the dilemma: The latest duct blaster testing on September 15 showed 103 CFM’s of total leakage.  But it only showed 12 CFM’s of leakage to the outside of the envelope.  This is 1.41 % leakage to the outside, substantially below the EarthCraft Virginia standard of 6% leakage to the outside of 51 CFM. 

I don’t know which way to counsel a solution in this situation.  The ductwork itself is being installed correctly to EarthCraft Standards.   The problems are encountered with the final hook up to the air handler, the terminations of the supply boots/registers and the return grill. 

The following is a little lengthy, but required to explore the issue.

Here’s what EarthCraft Standards say:

Required Air Sealing Measures

“Framed spaces that connect conditioned areas to unconditioned areas must be sealed with sheet material and sealant.”  A diagram shows all HVAC penetrations being sealed that lead to unconditioned areas.

Ductwork/Air Handler

“Required:  Duct Blaster test result <6cfm to outdoors per 100 Square Feet of floor area served.”   Or 51 CFM in this case.  The units tested are substantially below this requirement.

Duct Seams and Air Handler sealed with Mastic:

“All transverse seams in supply and return ducts, including supply and return plenums and leakage sites in the air handler, shall be sealed with duct mastic and fibrous reinforcing mesh according to SMACNA specifications.  Duct tape is not suitable sealant for ducts, but may be used for sealing leakage sites at the air handler’s removable access panels and at filter access panels.”  A diagram shows caulk between drywall and boot in sheetrocked, insulated ceilings. 

The entire HVAC system is inside the thermal envelope in these buildings now being tested.  The results of leakage to the outside are substantially lower than EarthCraft Standards—a good thing.  In order to improve the overall duct leakage substantially then improvements have to be made in the sealing of the Air Handler, the return plenum and supply terminations located in the sheetrock, hardwood floors and bath floor finishes. 

In the ceiling terminations many builders use caulk or a compression strip on the boot, so that the sheetrock is installed with this sealing in place.  Where existing hardwood floors are in place, usually found in  renovations, sealing these terminations is not as straight forward as new construction processes.  In new construction, there is a subfloor allowing a boot termination to overlap the subfloor between the hardwood and other finish floor, such as carpet, linoleum, vinyl.  This boot termination is sealed to the subfloor.

In the hardwood and bath terminations of Project X, the supply boot is terminated at floor level, with no overlap, leaving a gap between the supply boot and the floor.  It is not practical to install a mastically sealed boot overlap on the hardwood floor.  That leaves the issue of how best to seal.   It has to be something that not only seals, but can expand and contract with heat and cooling cycles.  Some contractors use tape that overlaps the floor that can be covered by the finish supply register. 

The termination of the Return Plenum is another story.  This leakage is within a couple feet of the Air Handler.  Its termination attachment to the framing is a big concern. It has been my experience over the past 3 years that return terminations can be haphazardly sealed, after all it is only a return, seems to be inherent in many contractors thinking.  Unfortunately return leakage causes pressure imbalances and the unit looks to make up the difference from other unfiltered sources.

This attachment is not affected by any differences between new construction and renovation techniques.  When this area isn’t sealed effectively, it is the source of major leakage.  The return grill is immediately put on with the setting of the air handler and extension of the sheet metal return duct making it impossible to inspect the termination without removing the grill.  The few grills I have removed have shown issues with the termination.   The one I saw this week with the sheet metal installed and no register in place, showed no sealing(see attached picture), now maybe this is being done, but is there anyway to hold off the installer from putting that grill in place until the termination seal with the framing is inspected by the supervisors or EarthCraft?  This makes a lot more common sense then testing, finding leakage and then having to remove it.  Many installers use mastic and tape to seal this properly. 

It might help the high total duct leakage results if the Air Handler itself was taped and sealed along the edges.  I see this done quite frequently.   The concern with some contractors is warranties.  It might also be advantageous to seal the access panel with duct tape and mastic and tape around the edges where the return meets the Air Handler in places where just bare metal exists. 

Yes, this is longwinded, but the sealing of all these areas was of concern to xxx when he was on site. It certainly would help the overall leakage and reduce duct leakage to the outside.  Real efforts are being made to correct the issue.  I have met with the HVAC contractor and the job supervisors on this and they are making a substantial effort at solutions on the subsequent buildings, only future tests will show if they are making a difference.  What is going on in the immediate area of the Air Handler and return is the ongoing concern.  But as mentioned above, there are some issues with a renovation, it isn’t as straight forward as the system approach for new construction.

This following is not all inclusive, but it will give you an idea of what basic information is required to be input into a Manual J program.

Size of dwelling unit, volume of unit.

Orientation-North, South, East, West

Insulation:  R value of walls, foundations, slabs, ceilings

Windows: Type, u-value, Solar Heat Gain Coefficient.

Infiltration: Air Changes per Hour, tightness of house.

Approximate Duct Leakage

Indoor Dry Bulb temperatures for winter and summer

There are more than a few other factors including Latitude, Elevation, and Temperature Range, but these parameters are not necessary for you to gain a basic understanding of the concept.

The Manual J is starting to be required in many locations for a building permit.  Why is it important?  Would you rather have your HVAC system based on a rule of thumb or actual field conditions? Me–If I was building or renovating a structure, especially one I am taking pains to make energy efficient, I want my HVAC based on reality.

Why am I going to build a Sustainable, Energy Efficient dwelling to Energy Star or another verifiable building program and then just have the HVAC contractor size it depending a rule of thumb based on a leaky, minimally insulated dwelling.

I am a Technical Representative for EarthCraft Virginia.  When you get an EarthCraft certification, you also get an Energy Star certification.  The critical issue in the process is energy efficiency.  This means sizing the HVAC correctly and installing it correctly.

I know that when I look at a Manual J calculated for EarthCraft House in Virginia, where Air to Air Heat Pumps are prevalent, if I see a sizing that shows me less than 800 Square Feet per ton, that someone hasn’t inputted the correct data.  An EarthCraft or an Energy Star certified house in my part of the world should be between 800-1200 Square Feet of Living Space per ton. That mean if I have a 1600 Square Foot House, the largest HVAC unit should be 2 tons.  If I build it tight, then it should be 1.5 tons.

There are standardized inputs for the Manual J.  An EarthCraft or Energy Star dwelling unit is not standard.  What do I see the most of:  Incorrect u values and solar heat gain coefficients(SHGC) for the windows.   I see window inputs that do not even meet Energy Star requirements for the location, even though the contractor knows this has to meet Energy Star Thermal Envelope Standards and Energy Star Window specifications for the region.

I see someone who has taken the pain to upgrade their insulation, and yet standard insulation is specified in the Man J.   I see infiltration numbers included that are totally excessive. I see duct leakage specified that does not meet Energy Star minimum standards.

I could go on and on.  Bottom line: What is the result of all this?  Usually an over-sized system, that does not operate efficiently in a supposed Energy Efficient dwelling.  Oversizing of HVAC systems means the builder/homeowner/building owner spends more money for less efficiency.  In my part of the world it also creates issues with mold, mildew, humidity problems and excessive heating and air conditioning bills.  It also means that if my contractor specifies a 3 ton unit and it should be 2 tons if done right, I just spent easily a $1000 for an additional ton I didn’t need.  How is that saving me money?

When you are building an energy efficient building, do yourself a favor, specify a manual J calculation and then look at the inputs.  If you don’t know what you are looking at, find someone who can tell you.  Putting in an HVAC system without proper sizing and input data is a waste of your time and money, whether you are a Home Owner, Builder, Developer or Building Owner.  “Build it tight, and size it right.”

“Lets shelve the word Green. Let’s use a real world term–”Sustainable.” Any commercial building owner, meaning the building is theirs, lock, stock and barrel, has to look at their investment simply as initial cost, operational and maintenance costs over the life of the investment and then residual worth. While that initial cost may be somewhat higher–it doesn’t have to be–if preplanned, not reactive planned. For sure the maintenance and operational costs over say 15 years should be substantially less than a building built strictly to code. The residual value of a sustainable building should be substantially more than some cheap thing thrown up. Take them all together and you have the real reason to build sustainably–economics. It is called Life Cycle analysis and utilized with common sense, it makes economic sense. ”

“Multi-family apartment owners have been analyzing return on investment using this approach for years. Usually in order to get financing they unrealistically minimized maintenance and operational costs, especially during the years of cheap energy. They also usually ended up with a building in need of substantial repair, so their residual value was minimized. Today looking at all these things realistically screams for a sustainable approach.”

The apartments are paying close attention to sealing the thermal envelope of each unit.  The Blower Door tests showed substantial reduction in Air Changes per Hour Natural.  They were coming in below .2 ACH natural.  That is pretty impressive in a renovation.  I haven’t previously had any renovations test that low.

Here is my problem.  HUD specs stated, so I am told, that the renovation of the HVAC system, all new, just be replaced matching what was there.  Are you kidding me?  We have 1.5 ton Heat Pump air handlers in apartment units that should have 1/2 of that.  We are talking about the humid southeast.  We are going to have an Air Conditioning unit come on, super cool the air and turn off.  Where is any concern about dehumidification?  Where is there any concern about the energy efficiency of the unit, whether it be in the cooling or heating mode?

A well designed space, to a recognized third party standard(ie. Energy Star), should have a ton of coolant to approximately 800-1200 Square Foot of living space.  Here we have 1.5 tons to a unit less than 500 SF.  That doesn’t make sense to me.

Everything coming out of Washington these days is about energy efficiency, alternative energy and sustainable(Green) building practices.  We are in the process of throwing billions of dollars at energy efficiency and energy alternatives.  If HUD or any other government unit just specifies “replace what is there with the equivalent,” what kind of standard is that?  It isn’t a standard. It isn’t adhering to what HUD, Department of Energy, the GSA are vocalizing.

Another question is what about Indoor Air Quality? If affordable housing renovations are going to result in less than .25 ACH natural, the point at which most sustainable programs, including Energy Star, say you need outside air delivered, aren’t these senior citizens, in this particular project going to be breathing some funky air?  Put another way aren’t we putting them at risk? Last I looked infants, children and seniors are the most susceptible to breathing problems and resultant illnesses.  What kind of standard is “Just replace what’s there?”

To me this is the ultimate in “Don’t do as I do, but do as I say.”  This is “Green Washing” at its best.  All buildings, multi-family, houses, offices, commercial space, schools must be looked at as a system, not a collection of individual items. I mean do we design cars just based on how the tires hold up.

If this is the prescribed path of energy efficiency adhered to by a government entity, entrusted with helping to provide affordable housing for our most at risk citizens, we are in some serious trouble.  Can’t we do projects that provide solutions and jobs for the long haul, not just quick fixes that provide jobs?

In the defense of contractors doing this kind of work, their hands are tied.  They want the work, people want and need the jobs, and I don’t blame them–its tough out there in the construction business.  When they even try to voice an opinion they jeopardize their ability to get the job, so its just “Shut-up and do it.”   There is nothing sustainable about doing something 1/2 assed other than we will be doing it again and again in the future to the same buildings.

“There is never time to do it right, but there is always time to do it over.”

I kind of lost some interest in blogging and tweeting the past few weeks.  Main reason is I periodically get overwhelmed by the amount of daily information I am inundated with regarding Green Building. I have to constantly ask myself, “What are you going to do?”   I mean how and what do I contribute to the over-abundance of information out there.  Then I laugh and say I don’t know, on one day I have answers and the next day I have doubts.  Many days I feel stuck in limbo or purgatory.  The amount of information, for someone in tuned to this movement, to absorb or understand is staggering.  Someone unsophisticated to this field would be overwhelmed.

I do know this:  The only thing I bring to this field is common sense, field application and good and bad experiences of over 30 years in the building business.

Why do I feel this way?  I am a boots on the ground individual.  I work daily with affordable non-profit builders and Low Income Housing Developers trying to get them to apply Energy Efficient and Sustainable Building practices sensibly and cost effectively to their multi-family and single family projects.  Because what very few seem to understand, it is still about money and common sense applications. There just isn’t enough money laying around to go for out there ideas and product.  At the moment in the world of for-profit building, there is not only no money, there isn’t any building, by normal standards, even going on.

There are a couple of things that haunt me in this world I work in.

1.  Many urban, low income and affordable housing occupants aren’t embracing this movement.  Why?  Too technical for them.  Not being explained simply.  Not applying the Keep it Simple Stupid(KISS) rule.
This group is about reality.  What does it do for me in allowing me to survive life?  Many redevelopment and housing agencies spend thousands of dollars on upgrading apartments and building new efficient housing, but the occupants are not educated about how to live in one or what the benefits are. They are just given the keys, crank the heat up to 80 or the the AC down to 65 and go about life.

2.   The information put out by the web, magazines, social media, e-mails and newspapers is daunting to the man on the street.  It is dominated by Building Scientists, Architects, Technocrats, Bureaucrats, Engineers and the dominant organizations in the movement(USGBC, RESNET, Energy Star, DOE, EPA, NAHB, Enterprise Foundation to name a few..)
I see very little information put out by hands on people.  The people who can tell you what is right, what works, what doesn’t work, what is cost effective and what is pure baloney. The people you have to convince this makes sense, so they will support the evolving processes, and we haven’t spent all kinds of dollars just to watch this movement stagger along blindly.

I additionally see very little participation in this critical movement by Hispanics, Blacks, and Blue Collar Workers.  When I attend conventions, training sessions, classes, seminars, design charrettes, developer meetings I scan the audience to see about the ethnic mix and sad to say it is predominantly white Americans or highly educated Europeans and Asians.

I know this, until you commonize the language, the approach, the goals and relate it to the man on the street in terms they can understand, this movement will continue to be the property of an educated society.  The money thrown at it will be like a front end loaded investment fund or non-contributing non-profit, the majority of dollars will sustain the overhead and operation, but the real work will be minuscule in application because of a lack of an understanding and dedicated work force.