<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">I would prefer no zombies
in the world. Hardly a choice.<br>
<br>
R2000 produces pretty mediocre buildings by today's standards. But
the process of education and freely available tools worked fairly
well. <br>
The newer lower energy-use expectations will require different
tools, more care and precision like Stuart says.<br>
<br>
But the R2000 folks did not and do not "chant 1.5ACH". This was
just an arbitrary target chosen to be a low as they could
practically get. <br>
the challenge with some PH advocates is that they claim 0.6 ACH50
is somehow scientifically based. The same with the window U-values
and HRV efficiencies.<br>
<br>
</font>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="0">Dr John Straube, P.Eng.
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.BuildingScience.com">www.BuildingScience.com</a></pre>
<br>
On 12-01-30 5:17 PM, Stuart Fix wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:5367cef23e4e5c53f80cbd00b19e1b46@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Rob,
Agreed, R-2000 produces really good buildings, but PH produces even better
buildings. They're similar standards really, R-2000 junkies chant 1.5ACH
and PH junkies chant 0.6ACH, which one is right?
R-2000 pretty much is building code in Ontario & BC these days. The
decision for market leaders is where to go from there? You might think
that's far enough. Many people would disagree.
My comments about vacuum-filling refer mostly to the USA, where PH has
really taken off in the past 5 years, and R-2000 never got much traction
there.
Cheers,
Stuart Fix, P.Eng., LEED® AP
PHI Certified Passive House Designer
MASc. Building Science
Mechanical Engineer
ReNü Building Science Inc.
#206, 506B St. Albert Trail | St. Albert, Alberta | T8N 5Z1 | C.
780.554.8192 | <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sfix@renubuildings.com">sfix@renubuildings.com</a>
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>] On Behalf Of RT
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 3:07 PM
To: Green Building
Subject: [Greenbuilding] Roof! Roof! (was re: windows - flush vs recessed)
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:28:31 -0500, Stuart Fix <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sfix@renubuildings.com"><sfix@renubuildings.com></a>
wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Yep, there is a lot of dogma in the PH world, and it's up to the more
technically capable PH consultants to wade through it and
reconstruct/translate proper location specific best practices.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">At the end of the day though, I'd prefer a legion of PH Zombies
chanting
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">[PH dogma <snipped>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">over a legion of uneducated, uninspired, and generally useless
race-to-the-bottom building designers/trades. I think that PH has
filled a vacuum for a large group of designers/builders in North
America who were wanting to build REALLY good buildings but didn't
know how.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Ahhhhm sorry, but I'm having a great deal of difficulty swallowing the
above.
I think that the tools that Canada's R-2000 program developed ~ 30 years
ago provided designers and builders with sufficient means and knowledge
to build REALLY good buildings and did it without the dogma.
If one viewed the R-2000 performance standard as one views the Building
Codes (ie a minimum rather than a target to aspire towards) then the
principles & techniques are just as valid in 2012 as they were in 1981.
--
=== * ===
Rob Tom
Kanata, Ontario, Canada
< A r c h i L o g i c at Y a h o o dot c a > (manually winnow the
chaff from my edress if you hit "reply")
_______________________________________________
Greenbuilding mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioen">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioen</a>
ergylists.org
_______________________________________________
Greenbuilding mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>