If you can't beat 'em, adopt their name

[Hayden Robinson]

For the last few years, PHIUS has used its bully pulpit to argue that Passive House is too hard and doesn't work. None the less, according to PHIUS, adoption of Passive House has grown exponentially. Now that its standard has been launched, PHIUS insists on calling it "passive house".

 

The focus of yesterday's PHNW board meeting was a proposal by two directors, who are also part of PHIUS leadership, insisting that PHNW change its mission to define "passive house" as a loose term, unrelated to the Passive House Standard, which would include PHIUS's standard.

 

If PHIUS succeeds in loosening passive house, I expect more will follow the example, further diluting the term. I think it's a shame. Having Passive House as a clear example of what's possible has moved building performance ahead by a generation and benefited us all.

 

-Hayden

 

Hayden Robinson Zertifizierter Passivhausdesigner

hayden robinson architect

206.691.3445

 

[Adam Cohen]

First, i want to point out that both PHI and PHIUS are adapting and changing their respective standards.  Both the PHI new PER standard and the PHIUS 2015 standard are forward looking and at this point are quite different in degrees, but not that different in intent.

I cannot sit back and read Hayden's simplistic argument that the new PHIUS standard is loosening the Passivhaus standard.  In some cases and some aspects some things can be "easier", but in many cases, (the reworked PE and the requirement that both DEMAND and PEAK load are met for heating and cooling) it can make it "harder".  So to say that the standard is being loosened is a mis-understanding at best or a deliberate attempt to spin peoples perception of the standard at worst

Some history now.  First and foremost, anyone experienced and knowledgeable about energy modeling and energy efficiency before being taught the 2007 PHPP should have realized that the PHI standard was a work in progress and while it had huge appeal and logic, it also had some gaping problems.

In 2009, four of my most burning issues with the system were: 15 kwh/m2 for heating and 15 kwh/m2 for cooling, the PE being based on a per sq meter calculation for residential projects, the inadequacy of the 2007 PHPP tool to predict cooling (sensible and latent loads), placing so much emphasis on the heating demand without a more nuanced additional comfort calculation.

1) 15 kwh/m2 for heating and 15 kwh/m2 for cooling - this never made sense to me, as someone that lives in a very cold climate like Thorsten Chlupp in Fairbanks had the same 30 kwh / m2 as I did as a conditioning budget, but half of that budget had to be used for cooling, so in essence since he had no cooling load, he had half the conditioning budget I did in Virginia where i could use both the cooling and heating demand.  So while i could take advantage of the 30kwh, Thorsten only could use 15.  Seemed off to me, just not logical.

2)  The PE being based on a per sq meter calculation for residential - this was something I complained vigorously to Katrin about in 2009, how could a standard aimed at combating climate change not certify a 1200 sq ft 3 bedroom house that used 121 kwh / m2 and certify a 7,000 sq ft 3 bedroom house that used 119 kwh/ m2.  This never made sense to me as it rewarded McMansionism.

3)   The inadequacy of the 2007 PHPP tool to predict cooling (sensible and latent loads) - As someone who has been designing and building for over 30 years in a mixed humid climate, I knew from my first class that the 2007 PHPP did not calculate cooling load correctly, and always did my cooling calculations outside the PHPP to get it right.

4)  Placing so much emphasis on the heating demand without a more nuanced additional comfort calculation. - As someone who practiced early Passive Solar design i understood that if you offer an either demand or peak calculation you risked projects being uncomfortable because of over reliance on solar gains to meet the demand calulation.  If the practitioners were not taught proper shading techniques, projects would be uncomfortable.

Many of these issues were dealt with in the newer incarnations of the PHPP, but some were not.  

One thing that has always stuck with me was something Wolfgang Feist told me in 2010 in Dresden, he said, and i paraphrase "don't worry so much about the numbers and the name, just go out and build good buildings".  I took this to heart and have dedicated my life to doing just this.  i highly recommend that the PHnw board realize that both standards have their roots in the same place and the same goals and that they both have strengths and weaknesses, and they support anything that gets our industry moving in the right direction.

I have said many times that right now the Passiv methodology is the best one i know of for honest low energy buildings and i will pursue it vigorously until something better comes along.

It is time to stop the navel gazing and whining and go out and build good buildings!

my 2 cents - that + $3 get you coffee - maybe.

~ Cheers!

--
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.BuildSMARTna.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/

             

 

888.376.3424 (Build Smart office)

540.312.8400 (cell)

[Hayden Robinson]

Adam,

 

You miss-read my email. What I said was that the PHNW directors form PHIUS were insistent on turning "passive house" into a loose term. To me, that would make "passive house" meaningless, like "green". If they are successful, I expect a lot of folks will be jumping on that bandwagon, and that's a shame.

 

I didn't go into PHIUS+'s relaxed criteria. That math has been demonstrated plenty of times. And c'mon, relaxing the standard is stated goal of PHIUS+. Are you really arguing that PHIUS somehow failed?

 

Yours,

Hayden

 

Hayden Robinson Zertifizierter Passivhausdesigner

hayden robinson architect

206.691.3445

 

[Adam Cohen]

Hayden,

While I think it is good to have open discussion, it is obvious to me that you have not really delved into either the Phius or new Phi standard as both can be both harder and easier depending on the climate, design, etc

Please at least look into it enough so you stop the mid statement

Sent from mobile. Please excuse mis-types.

[Adam Cohen]

Sorry mis-types statement

Sent from mobile. Please excuse mis-types.

[Bronwyn Barry]

This is an ongoing comedy of cross-purposed communication that even I'm tired of...  while Hayden, myself and others are focused on holding onto a name and definition, Adam and others are hung up on the Heating Demand from the 2007 PHPP (and also holding on to the same name.)  When this is all boiled down to it's core, we are left with two German Institutes at the end of the software food chain.  (Who btw, have a long-standing disagreement between them.)    

From watching this play out from a short distance away, I'm amazed that the PHnw leadership is heroically attempting to hold these two conflicting groups together...   PHAUS Portland already exists and has been competing with PHnw for membership for a while already.  Why not let the two groups go their separate ways, divvy up what cash you have available in the bank and be done with it?

For those of you interested in moving forward with using the PHPP software, and focussing on some great projects (many with excellent performance data) and policy efforts that have been taking shape across the continent over the past few years, the NAPHN Conference and Expo is all set to start this week just up the road in Vancouver.  The program is a fabulous mix of practical and technical, with an additional policy focussed track designed specifically to help speed the adoption of Passive House across the continent.  Tickets are still available here: http://naphn15.canphi.ca/

Pre-conference workshops on Wednesday include:

• Passive House Window Design & Certification: Understanding Performance for Advanced Practitioners and Window Manufacturers
  
• DesignPH – Intro and Updates 
  
• PHPP v9 – Updates, New Certification Classes and Primary Energy Renewable (PER) Calculations
  
• Passive House Fundamentals: An Intro for Developers, Policy Makers and Building Officials
  
• Multi-family and Large Passive House Design

I look forward to seeing many of you there!

Bronwyn 

Bronwyn Barry, CPHD

Director - One Sky Homes

m: 415.819.7978

t: @passivehouseBB and @oneskyhomes

http://www.oneskyhomes.com/video/hair-dryer-home

www.oneskyhomes.com

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

[Hayden Robinson]

Adam,

 

You are welcome to your opinion. PHIUS's own argument for PHIUS+ concluded that Passive House is too hard, too expensive, and need to be relaxed to increase adoption. I understand that that is inconvenient to now. I also understand PHIUS's desire to associate it's standard with the prestige and reputation of Passive House.

 

-Hayden

 

Hayden Robinson Zertifizierter Passivhausdesigner

hayden robinson architect

206.691.3445

 

[Adam Cohen]

Hayden,

This is not my opinion, this is real world experience with real projects.

Sent from mobile. Please excuse mis-types.

[BB Gmail]

Hey Adam,

Can you point to any measured data with costs associated that illustrate your and PHIUS's claims? All I've seen is enough modeled calculations, graphs and degree day comparisons to paralyze an army. Of analysts.

Your (and PHIUS's) leading criticism of the 15kWh/m2a is also not true. Heat Load has always been an alternate target option and allows much more flexibility in both hotter and colder climates. It was simply not well taught, understood or utilized. (I do get that harping on the '15' makes for a great narrative. Let it go. It undermines your credibility.)

You (and PHIUS) would be much more believable if you simply stated that you want your own certification path and regime that can be controlled locally.  (Until Fraunhofer wants more visibility.) I'll buy that. 

Sent from my iPhone

[Adam Cohen]

Bronwyn, 

I am not making any "claims".  All I reported was that on some of my projects some of the PHIUS metrics are harder, not easier as Hayden asserts.  That is all i was saying.

Also, as i have said to you and others, they are to different systems that use the same history and same physics to achieve slightly different metrics.  Both are utilizing the term "Passive", yet both rely on some active methods (ERV / HRV for example) to achieve their targets.  Both are based on the work of many people and NOBODY owns the term 'passive'.

I use and see value in both systems, but see no value in all this whining about names.  It is counter productive, and to say anyone has the "ownership" of a word like Passive is absurd and counter productive.

 

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Hayden Robinson <em...@haydenrobinson.com> wrote:

[BB Gmail]

Ok. I'll happily ignore all that blizz-blazz about the 2007 PHPP then. ;) 

Thanks. 

Sent from my iPhone

[Adam Cohen]

Good, I did say some of the issues were fixed in later releases

Sent from mobile. Please excuse mis-types.

[Kristen Simmons]

The good news is that names and philosophies won't matter at all once building code finally catches up to the "Standard", whatever you want to call it. :-)

Frankly, I find the in-fighting to be exhausting and demoralizing. I'm sure that I'm not the only one who finds it to be a distraction from our shared overarching goal (of making low energy/low carbon building the standard for our country). IMHO, PHI and PHIUS are still more similar to each other than anything else in the US, and the US is big enough for two certification programs*. Wearing my public policy hat, both are useful (in different ways) for promoting widespread adoption of low energy/low carbon building. If the competition stops, we can focus more on grabbing a bigger market share of new construction. That's where I'm putting my energy. The fighting is one of the reasons I no longer participate on the national level after being so actively involved.

*Especially given the number of projects being certified annually. FWIW I am up-to-date on both, including their benefits and drawbacks. Both have made some impressive modifications in the last year or so and could really learn from each other if personalities could stop getting in the way.

[Adam Cohen]

Good comment Kristin

Sent from mobile. Please excuse mis-types.

[Bronwyn Barry]

Bring data and I'll happily sing Kumbayah with you all.  I want good buildings too.  Keep repeating 'old saws' that aren't true and I'm sure to comment.  

[Sam Hagerman]

Thank you Kristen.  What we have here are strong personalities and hurt feelings.

Forgiveness and compassion should be added to all certification requirements.

Sam

--
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.

--

Sam Hagerman
Co-founder and President,

Board member, Passive House Alliance US

Join me on Google+

[Hayden Robinson]

Sam,

 

Thanks for commenting. It's good to have another PHIUS leader join Adam on this thread.

 

A quick question for you:

 

Why do you think those that complain about scrutiny of PHIUS+ are silent when PHIUS uses it's pulpit to criticize Passive House?

 

Personally, I think PHIUS has provided a service to us all, and suspect that Passive House has improved as a result. But I think it works both ways.

 

For any that don't know, Sam was president of PHIUS's trade group for a number of years and he sponsored the PHIUS+ unveiling celebration last year. He owns a reputable and successful construction company, employs of Zack Semke, who has often contributed to this forum, and also employs one of the PHIUS leaders who is currently insisting that PHNW endorse a loosened definition of Passive House.

 

Hayden Robinson Zertifizierter Passivhausdesigner

hayden robinson architect

206.691.3445

 

From: Passive...@googlegroups.com [mailto:Passive...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sam Hagerman
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2015 10:22 AM
To: passive...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: If you can't beat 'em, adopt their name

 

Thank you Kristen.  What we have here are strong personalities and hurt feelings.