Can't PHIUS succeed on its own merits?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

email

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 1:46:54 PM4/30/15
to Passive...@googlegroups.com

Adam, you are too modest about your PHIUS leadership role.

Is it true really true that, in your experience, "the Passive House name connotes 1970's over glazed, overly massive, uncomfortable Passive Solar Residential" ? At a recent PHNW Board meeting, another PHIUS leader was insisting that Passive House is a meaningless generic, and that PHNW's definition of Passive House needed to be changed to include PHIUS+.

I get how genericizing Passive House make strategic sense for PHIUS. PHIUS+ has done a great job of branding itself. If it can muddy the waters so that Passive House doesn't mean anything, PHIUS+ becomes the only clear choice.

I also get that you've worked hard on PHIUS+. Let your efforts succeed through their own merits. Please respect the 100's of people that have asked you to do just that.

Yours, Hayden

From: "Adam Cohen" <adam.c...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 8:58 AM
To: Passive...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: What does PHIUS want?

Hayden, 

Once again I do not care what it is called, and I leave the naming to the people that have the authority to name it.  That is not you or I.

I always specify to my clients that I use Passivhaus methodologies (as well as other techniques) in my projects and that I will optimize their project for performance and cost. If the clients want a stamp of certification we will do that too, whether is  PHI, PHIUS+, LEED, Living Building, whatever they want. 

I believe those folks focused on the poor name are wasting effort and time and probably causing themselves more issues then the world as a whole.  Most folks (99% of North America) does not give a hoot about anything we are doing or what it is called.

I truly believe all your consternation about the poor name is "much ado about nothing" as the "market confusion" you speak of, in my experience does not exist regarding the name Passive House and PHI / PHIUS+, as much as it does that the Passive House name connotes 1970's over glazed, overly massive, uncomfortable Passive Solar Residential. This is the market confusion I deal with regularly.

~ Cheers!

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:34 AM, email <em...@haydenrobinson.com> wrote:

Adam,

Thank you for your agnosticism. You are a wise man and I respect you. Hundreds have asked PHIUS to use its competitor's name. Keeping space between the Passive House and PHIUS allows for choice and fair competition. I think this benefits all of us.

Is it unreasonable to expect PHIUS to succeed on its own merits and distinguish its programs with a different name?

Yours,

Hayden




From: "Adam Cohen" <adam.c...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 7:24 AM
To: Passive...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: What does PHIUS want?


Bronwyn,

You have obviously missed my post where I said it is a horrible name in North America and needs a new one (for all of us).  I personally am not claiming or not claiming anything.  I want to make several points about your continued over statements about my personal position. First, history:
  1. In my career, I have always been out on the "crazy town" side of things, whether it was off grid "healthy homes" I built 30 years with no glues or chemicals utilizing 55 watt ARCO panels, or the SIPS projects I did starting in 1984 or the super insulated homes i built in the 80's that failed or the ICF projects in the early 1990s, or being an early Earthcraft & LEED proponent.  I have always looked for the best way to deliver great buildings.
  2. Since 2009 Passivhaus has been the road I have traveled.  
  3. In 2010, I had a very enlightening realization when Dr. Feist told me, "just go out and build good buildings, call them whatever you want"
  4. Also in 2010, I spent a month in Germany and Austria investigating large scale commercial buildings and found that there were many buildings that were called Passive House that were far from it.  In fact, that theme has continued even on the tours that I have taken at conferences.  
Bronwyn, you keep trying to make my position equate with one of anti PHI and pro PHIUS, when in fact I am agnostic in the politics. Rather,  my engagement is in pushing the  high performance movement in North America forward, and i will use any and all tools to do it and help where and when I feel i can help.  If tomorrow someone came up with a better mousetrap to deliver market rate high performance i would adopt that. i would greatly appreciate it if you would keep your barbs aimed at the right spots.  If you want to discuss with me the pros and cons of different systems, then by all means let's do that, but fighting over a bad name is friggin' stupid and I do not and will not engage in it except to say it is a bad name for all of North America!  

You keep arguing (and in your position as keeper of the faith for PHI in the US, I understand this) that I am trying to claim the "name" when in fact i am not.  I am using the best of  anything I can.  in fact now I am running all my projects in parallel using both standards to fully understand their implications in the climates i work in.  You made the statement that I have been "publicly bashing that standard and claiming it doesn't work here in our special climates." I believe if you go back and look at all the things i have written and presented you will find that to be not true.  I have questioned many things about the standard, and intellectually that is what I do and have done my whole life.  I learned as a young person to question everything and ask why and ask myself "what do i think".  I believe you look at bringing up points like the "small house penalty" and the fact that in reality super cold climates only have 15 kWh/m2 conditioning budget when I get 30 kwh/m2 in my mixed climate" as bashing, when in reality it is having an informed dialogue.  I question everything and take nothing on FAITH on anything in my life, including energy modeling and metrics.

In the early days if i had not dug into the PHPP and uncovered the problems with the the 2007 versions cooling and dehumidification algorithms my projects would have suffered.  I never accept anything at face value until I understand it.

Even now, the PER system, which I think is very exciting, I want to know the intricacies behind the algorithms so i can understand it and ask myself "do i agree or do I see room for improvement" At this past conference I asked Wolfgang about this, remember this is who I am and what I do.

I hope that you will respect my intellectual curiosity and stop trying to portray my actions in the political way it feels like you are.  i believe you know me better then that.

Thank you!

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Bronwyn Barry <bronwyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dan, Adam et al,

I'm intrigued that you're now wanting to claim a piece of the Passive House pie after years of publicly bashing that standard and claiming it doesn't work here in our special climates.  I thought the story was that PHIUS+ is a big move away from the existing Passive House standard?  From all the articles PHIUS has posted, they're clearly claiming the more neutral territory of 'passive building standards.' And now you want 'Passive House' too? That's bold.  Furthermore, if PHIUS+ really is different and is calculated per person and includes credit for PV, why would you still want to call it 'Passive House?'  You can't have your pie and eat it too. (Adam, if you see that as 'mud-slinging' think of this as a creamy mud pie. :)

PHIUS+ wants to go it's own way and be its own thing.  Wonderful.  I'm happy to wish anyone who attempts to meet those standards the best of luck.  However, this insistence on claiming ground that is already occupied by a well supported, vibrant and existing standard is not only incredibly aggressive, but outrageously rude (particularly after the last three years of droning on about how 'Passive House' doesn't work.)  

This is no time to call in the Belgians, Swedes, Norwegians etc. to your defense either.  (We're not bringing in the Germans, the Austrians, the Brits, Kiwi's, Australians or the Chinese - even though they're all clamoring to attend and support our conference!)  Every single one of those variations (perhaps with the exception of one Italian) have remained well connected to the Passive House Institute.  Their metrics hew very closely to the original standard, with minor deviations or additions.  The PHIUS+ standards just moved far enough away from Passive House as to make claims to 'passive' tenuous, at best.  (A standard that hinges on the cost of and gives credit for PHIUS+PV tips the balance well into the realm of 'active'.)  And that is ok.

I can assure you that by differentiating yourselves clearly, embracing your 'active' side, and by finally letting go of the Passive House name, the possibility of 'working together' will become much more likely.  Nobody likes having their toes stood on. 

Respectfully yours,
Bronwyn





On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Dan Whitmore <dwhi...@hammerandhand.com> wrote:

Hayden-
 

For me, I see many of these difficulties stemming from the ambiguities of the label under which we are working to build 'the best buildings in the world'. For the most part, this open-ness has been utilized as a strength.

 

As Bronwyn states, there are 40,000+ Passive House structures in the world. Are 100% of these heated with the equivalent of a hair dryer? Clearly not. As only about 10% of them are even 'Certified' by some agency, how many are even designed/constructed to one of the handful of Passive House metrics?

 

Looking at those 40,000, how many are in jurisdictions which don't utilize the parameters of the Passivhaus Institute aka the Passive House Institute? I'd posit that there are a good percentage, yet they are included in the message that this is a successful building movement (which it is, thankfully). 

 

I find it disingenuous to say that the PHIUS+ Standard is not a Passive House Standard when there are many and changing definitions, even from your chosen authority. Yes, the parameters and defining metrics have been designated at differing touch-points, but they're all built around this core idea: utilizing passive measures to reduce space conditioning needs by up to 90% and then using this terrifically effective strategy as a part of reducing total building energy needs by game changing levels. 

 

The ship of accepting a more open definition of 'Passive House' sailed from the European docks years ago. As I stated in an earlier post, ask the Belgians, Swedes, Norwegians, Finns, Swiss, and the Italians. Tossing out platitudes about how PHIUS is undermining the idea of Passive House and the numbers as defined by the entrusted German Scientists (I almost feel like they are being held up as the sacred Founding Fathers) is by design divisive. This resonates more as a protectionist move than an analysis of how to address energy consumption and build this movement as a whole.

 

To be clear, the basis of the recent Standard Adaptation is founded in both science and building practice and it is intended to move 'the best buildings in the world' further forward.

 

As a practitioner who is actively working on these structures, I can tell you fundamentally that both the 'Passive House Classic' and PHIUS+ Standards are terrifically difficult levels of efficiency to reach. The differences between them are nuanced and do need better definition; this will be forthcoming. They, with all the other Passive House paths, can actually affect how humans impact the globe especially when we work together. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Passive House Northwest" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PassiveHouseN...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Bronwyn Barry, CPHD
Certified Passive House Consultant
Director - One Sky Homes
t: @passivehouseBB and @oneskyhomes

     


Join me here at:      www.naphn15.canphi.ca 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Passive House Northwest" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PassiveHouseN...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Adam Cohen
Certified Passivhaus Consultant - North America and Europe
Registered Architect MD, VT, NH & CO, LEED AP, NAHB Green Professional
Design/Builder of the First US Passivhaus Public School Building
2012 VSBN Green Designer of the Year
2013 Green Builder Green Home of the Year

EMAIL POLICY

In an effort to increase productivity, I answer email as follows:

Monday - Friday
  •  a maximum of 1 hour in the AM (Before 10 AM EST)
  •  a maximum of 1 hour in the PM (After 5:30PM EST)
Sign up for our components newsletter here: http://eepurl.com/2MTDn

Web site: www.structuresdb.com 
Commercial Passivhaus information: http://passivscience.com/
Factory Built Passivhaus Component information: http://www.passivstructures.com/
Passivhaus information: http://www.passivehousedesign.us/
More Passivhaus info: http://www.viking-house.us/
High Performance Design: http://quantum-architects.com/

         

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Passive House Northwest" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PassiveHouseN...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Passive House Northwest" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PassiveHouseN...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Adam Cohen
Certified Passivhaus Consultant - North America and Europe
Registered Architect MD, VT, NH & CO, LEED AP, NAHB Green Professional
Design/Builder of the First US Passivhaus Public School Building
2012 VSBN Green Designer of the Year
2013 Green Builder Green Home of the Year

EMAIL POLICY

In an effort to increase productivity, I answer email as follows:

Monday - Friday
  •  a maximum of 1 hour in the AM (Before 10 AM EST)
  •  a maximum of 1 hour in the PM (After 5:30PM EST)
Sign up for our components newsletter here: http://eepurl.com/2MTDn

Web site: www.structuresdb.com 
Commercial Passivhaus information: http://passivscience.com/
Factory Built Passivhaus Component information: http://www.passivstructures.com/
Passivhaus information: http://www.passivehousedesign.us/
More Passivhaus info: http://www.viking-house.us/
High Performance Design: http://quantum-architects.com/

         

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Passive House Northwest" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PassiveHouseN...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Adam Cohen

unread,
Apr 30, 2015, 2:06:06 PM4/30/15
to Passive...@googlegroups.com
Hayden,

My role in PHIUS is as a thought leader and technical expert.  

I happily have served as vice chair of the tech committee with a group of amazing volunteers with tremendous breadth of knowledge.  This is a committee that is a consensus based group that does some really tough and detailed work.  This requires a good bit of time on my part, but i feel i can contribute here as an expert in my area, and I continually learn from the other members.

I also co wrote and co teach the Builder Training with Dan and Mike.  This too is I feel is important work, I do not care what you call it, teaching folks to build high performance buildings moves the industry forward, even if they never build a PHI or PHIUS certified project, we teach how to build better, which is really important work.

That is my position, all volunteer, no policy or politics.  As you know, I express myself and speak truth to power (or perceived power) and i get in as much hot water by expressing my opinions in both PHI and PHIUS camps, but do not stop engaging or expressing my opinions.  i try my best to lead by example and as much as possible to only speak my opinion in a reasoned, respectful and non-inflammatory manner. 

I happily put time into moving the movement forward, but think the political BS is just that - Horse Hockey.  

Hayden, your recent comparison of the two systems was very nicely done, however you followed that up with a simple and frankly unhelpful summary of the two systems in two over simplified statements meant to be divisive.  

I strongly encourage you to apply your considerable abilities to the higher road and to continue helpful and thoughtful dialogue and leave the over simplified platitude bomb throwing to others who do not have your intellectual ability. 

With respect, @

Rob Harrison AIA

unread,
May 2, 2015, 4:35:07 PM5/2/15
to Passive...@googlegroups.com
Adam wrote:
... the "market confusion" you [Hayden] speak of, in my experience does not exist regarding the name Passive House and PHI / PHIUS+, as much as it does that the Passive House name connotes 1970's over glazed, overly massive, uncomfortable Passive Solar Residential. This is the market confusion I deal with regularly.

This has been my experience as well. The public isn't confused by PHI vs PHIUS definitions of Passive House as much as they are by the reference (an acknowledgement of roots, as I recall Dr. Feist saying) to Passive Solar in the name. I can't tell you how many times over the last six years I've said "I do Passive House," and people have responded with "Oh--I lived in an underground house my parents built in the late 70's!" Denis Hayes, even--and a more learned and sophisticated person on the subject of low energy building you'd be hard pressed to find--said something along those lines when I met him for the first time at the Worldchanging Future City event in 2010. (Despite Bronwyn having given him the intro prior to that, back when she was a rep for Pazen Windows!) 

It is my understanding directly from Dr. Feist (when that group of us had lunch with him when he was visiting Seattle last time) that he intends the term "Passive House" to be generic, to represent the approach, not the rating system. (Which is consistent with Kat's thoughts, as I understand it.) That's why we see the "40,000 Passive House projects" in Europe, of which something like 1,500--2,000 are certified, according to a Twitter conversation I had with Dr. Feist a couple years ago. Those 40,000 include projects done under a variety of standards.

So...let's let it go for now, and use whatever standard makes the most sense for each of our projects, and keep sharing amongst each other how and why and what for! The differences between the approaches are really interesting, and I LOVE the idea of testing the standards against each other over the next year as Adam has suggested. I'm psyched to have read these exchanges and I appreciate the passion and intelligence that has gone into them. 

As I mentioned offline to Joe, it's easy to make a google-group "private." (Limit visibility to members.) I'd rather do that, and keep the discussion going, than have posts moderated for anti-PHI or anti-PHIUS content. That said, I am a little aggravated by how personal a few of the posts have been. We're all working on the same thing here. It has taken on some of the "angels on the head of a pin" aspect, IMO. 

Onward!

Rob



Rob Harrison
Certified Passivhaus Designer + Consultant
HARRISON architects

lyrical sustainable design  ::  passive house plus
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages