Photovoltaic Systems

Last week, the formation of the new International Green Construction Code was announced through the partnership of several organizations already deeply connected with green building efforts. The preliminary version of the model code is now available for public review and comment.

The introduction of this additional green building standard will take some time to sort out. But it should not be viewed as competition to LEED or other rating systems so much as it is a complement to them. (USGBC’s active participation [PDF] in the new standard should make that point obvious.) Instead, there is a greater variety of standards available as tools to help all members of a building team produce better buildings.

IGCC is supported by a collaboration of the ICC (International Code Council), ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers), USGBC (U.S. Green Building Council), and IES (Illuminating Engineering Society). 

This also combines ICC with the other organizations that were responsible for developing the ASHRAE 189.1 Standard for the Design of High-Performance Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings.

ASHRAE 189.1 has been criticized by some groups for not being as tough a set of requirements as it could be, but this misses the broader intent for its application.  While LEED has always targeted the most progressive and forward-looking projects for certification, the new green building code from IGCC should offer a more basic, though less stringent option, that is still more effective than a building that only meets code minimum.

Rick Fedrizzi, President, CEO, and Founding Chairman of the USGBC, noted that this new standard helps “establish a higher floor” for green building, which allows USGBC to “raise the ceiling” for the highest performing buildings, according to a statement.  

The IGCC follows a number of development concepts which are explained on the website:

• Will use the “model” code approach;
• Will work as an overlay to the ICC Family of Codes;
• Will provide performance, prescriptive, and pre-engineered solutions;
• Minimum and advanced levels of performance (green & high performance buildings);
• Written in mandatory language that provides a new regulatory framework;
• Will account for local conditions;
• Reflects the AIA 2030 Challenge;
• Works in tandem with leading green rating systems; and
• Designed with local, state, and federal law in mind.

As with the model building codes, the IGCC will follow a regular cycle of review and improvement to increase requirements and push the industry further.

I saw Randolph Croxton — principal of Croxton Collaborative Architects and one of the earliest proponents for what has become green building design — speak in the mid ’90s, and he talked about codes and the need to build better buildings: “If you build a building and you say it meets all code requirements, all that means is that if you had done just one thing less, it would be an illegal building.“ 

We should aspire to do more than the minimum, and the arrival of a new standard helps to push matters in that direction. 

It should not be lamented that a milder standard is available.  Most of the buildings that will be built to this standard likely would not have obtained LEED certification.  But this will allow more building teams to create buildings with some clear guidelines that will help them build buildings that are better than just code-minimum.

[PDF] Download a preliminary version of IGCC.

The University of British Columbia’s Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (CIRS) will be a candidate to be regarded as one of the greenest buildings in North America once it is completed.  The building, which is presently under construction in Vancouver, is not only a superb example of sustainability in building design, but its purpose is to foster and accelerate sustainability and to bring together researchers, businesses, and nonprofits to work collaboratively on issues of sustainability. 

The mission statement (PDF) for the building calls it a “living laboratory of sustainability.“  The design of the building avoids checklist green building, and instead is reaching to become a truly sustainable building:

“The first goal is to build a building that as far as possible lives off its biophysical income: the flows of energy and matter that are found on its own site. A substantial portion of the electricity that CIRS uses will come from the sunlight landing on the building. A significant portion of the ventilation will be supplied naturally by the wind. All of the lighting for all parts of the building will come from the sun, when it is available. All of the heating for the building will be supplied by capturing waste heat from adjacent buildings and through a ground source heat pump system. All of the water used in the building will be treated and reused.”

What is notable about this goal is the encompassing nature of what is
projected for building performance:  Daylighting for all parts of the
building, when it is available.  All water used in the building will be
treated and reused.  The building is even expected to be a net producer of energy. Rather than talking about the building systems in percentages, as is often seen when talking about the benefits of green buildings, the descriptions of CIRS are stated in absolutes and imperatives.

The second goal also is extremely well suited to a green building by making many parts of the building replaceable.  All building systems are meant to be treated as a research test-bed, to be able to be “replaced in a ‘plug-and-play’ fashion as technologies improve.“  Rather than fixing the building at the technology of the present day, a modular approach is being taken so that improvements in technology can readily be adapted into the building.  The construction of the building is further described as having a “demountable structure that is constructed from precast concrete and wood that will allow easy deconstruction and material recovery.“

Here, as well, the design team recognizes that green building is still very much a changing field, and what they are doing now is not necessarily going to be the best practice 10 or 20 years from now.  By building in flexibility, they make it easier for ongoing operation of the building, as well as keeping it relevant and at the forefront of green building.  Testing of materials and systems can also be carried out more easily when one product is swapped for another, to allow observation of different systems in the same environment

The design approach also seeks to be reproducible.  “[G]old-plated sustainability is not replicable. Our goal is to build CIRS for roughly the same cost as other comparable university buildings coming on line in the same time period.“  This makes the building relevant as an example that others can look to with design strategies that are accessible and applicable for other buildings. 

Monitoring the building is also an important part of tracking and evaluating the performance of the building.  “A thousand points of monitoring will be built into CIRS, to collect data on the building’s performance and to develop a set of indicators applicable to the monitoring of other buildings,” according to the Greater Vancouver Green Guide.

Interestingly, while architect Busby Perkins + Will has hundreds of LEED accredited professionals on staff, and the firm has completed numerous LEED projects, there is no mention of LEED certification of the building in any of the materials reviewed.  The building is presently under construction, which you can follow on Flickr, with an anticipated opening in 2011.

Rendering credits: Busby Perkins + Will; noticed at EcoGeek.

The University of British Columbia’s Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (CIRS) will be a candidate to be regarded as one of the greenest buildings in North America once it is completed.  The building, which is presently under construction in Vancouver, is not only a superb example of sustainability in building design, but its purpose is to foster and accelerate sustainability and to bring together researchers, businesses, and nonprofits to work collaboratively on issues of sustainability. 

The mission statement (PDF) for the building calls it a “living laboratory of sustainability.“  The design of the building avoids checklist green building, and instead is reaching to become a truly sustainable building:

“The first goal is to build a building that as far as possible lives off its biophysical income: the flows of energy and matter that are found on its own site. A substantial portion of the electricity that CIRS uses will come from the sunlight landing on the building. A significant portion of the ventilation will be supplied naturally by the wind. All of the lighting for all parts of the building will come from the sun, when it is available. All of the heating for the building will be supplied by capturing waste heat from adjacent buildings and through a ground source heat pump system. All of the water used in the building will be treated and reused.”

What is notable about this goal is the encompassing nature of what is
projected for building performance:  Daylighting for all parts of the
building, when it is available.  All water used in the building will be
treated and reused.  The building is even expected to be a net producer of energy. Rather than talking about the building systems in percentages, as is often seen when talking about the benefits of green buildings, the descriptions of CIRS are stated in absolutes and imperatives.

The second goal also is extremely well suited to a green building by making many parts of the building replaceable.  All building systems are meant to be treated as a research test-bed, to be able to be “replaced in a ‘plug-and-play’ fashion as technologies improve.“  Rather than fixing the building at the technology of the present day, a modular approach is being taken so that improvements in technology can readily be adapted into the building.  The construction of the building is further described as having a “demountable structure that is constructed from precast concrete and wood that will allow easy deconstruction and material recovery.“

Here, as well, the design team recognizes that green building is still very much a changing field, and what they are doing now is not necessarily going to be the best practice 10 or 20 years from now.  By building in flexibility, they make it easier for ongoing operation of the building, as well as keeping it relevant and at the forefront of green building.  Testing of materials and systems can also be carried out more easily when one product is swapped for another, to allow observation of different systems in the same environment

The design approach also seeks to be reproducible.  “[G]old-plated sustainability is not replicable. Our goal is to build CIRS for roughly the same cost as other comparable university buildings coming on line in the same time period.“  This makes the building relevant as an example that others can look to with design strategies that are accessible and applicable for other buildings. 

Monitoring the building is also an important part of tracking and evaluating the performance of the building.  “A thousand points of monitoring will be built into CIRS, to collect data on the building’s performance and to develop a set of indicators applicable to the monitoring of other buildings,” according to the Greater Vancouver Green Guide.

Interestingly, while architect Busby Perkins + Will has hundreds of LEED accredited professionals on staff, and the firm has completed numerous LEED projects, there is no mention of LEED certification of the building in any of the materials reviewed.  The building is presently under construction, which you can follow on Flickr, with an anticipated opening in 2011.

Rendering credits: Busby Perkins + Will; noticed at EcoGeek.

Despite the fact that we are now living in the 21st century, aerogel insulation seems like a material out of science-fiction. It is the lightest solid known, although by volume it is 99% air. It is breathable, but it doesn’t absorb water. It is incredibly strong for its weight. But most importantly, it is a fantastic insulator.

Some specialty insulation companies are now producing aerogel products that can be used for building insulation, although the largest market
for the material is still in industry. Aerogel insulation is also
exciting because it provides good benefit with a thin profile. For
instance, shipping-containers, which have a narrow width to begin with,
can be insulated without giving up too much valuable space to attaching
insulation to the walls.

A couple products are now available on the market, although their use is still constrained because of the relatively high cost of the material. Aspen Aerogels makes an aerogel blanket called Spaceloft, and Thermablok produces narrow strips of aerogel that may be a more cost-effective way of utilizing aerogel insulation without breaking the bank.

Aerogel is such a good insulator that a blowtorch on one side cannot light a match on the opposite side. While that is an extreme case, it demonstrates the effectiveness of the material. (And if you are a numbers geek, a typical aerogel insulation blanket has a thermal conductivity of 0.091 BTU-in/hr-sq.ft.-F at an ambient temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit, corresponding to an R-value of more than R-10 per inch. That’s nearly double the insulation value of the best rigid insulation boards currently available.)

Aspen Aerogels’ Spaceloft Insulation,
is a 57-inch wide roll of aerogel material available in 0.20 in. and
0.40 in. thickness. Spaceloft is a useful product for insulating
existing walls in retrofit situations where it is important to minimize
the amount of floor area lost to building up wall insulation. An old
brick building can be a beautiful thing, but brick makes a poor
insulator. Instead of building a new insulated wall against the
existing wall that would be 4″ thick (or more), a Spaceloft blanket
covered by drywall can achieve similar energy-efficiency in a wall
covering that is less than an inch thick.

According to Martin LaMonica of CNET, Spaceloft blankets have been used by the Rhode Island Housing Authority to retrofit a 50-unit housing complex that was built with no insulation in the 1940s.

Thermablok manufactures aerogel in 1-1/2″ wide strips rather than broad sheets. In stud wall construction, the cavity between the studs is filled with insulation, but the studs themselves can conduct heat and cold, a process known as “thermal bridging,” which reduces the thermal performance of the wall. By covering the studs with strips of aerogel insulation before the interior drywall or exterior sheathing is applied, the thermal bridging is broken, and the thermal performance of the wall can increase by 30% or more. This can be an efficient use of aerogel material in a cost-effective way.

Thermablok strips can be installed on the exterior of the studs during new construction, or can be applied on the interior during remodeling as well as new construction. This makes it suitable for energy efficiency retrofits. As with Spaceloft blankets, because Thermablok is so thin (about 1/4″ once installed), it can be used to improve performance without taking away great amounts of space from inside the building.

Thermablok strips have been used in the Solar Decathlon house from the California College of the Arts and the University of Santa Clara, California (also known as the Refract House shown above). Suggested retail price for Thermablok tape is $1.99/ft.

Photo credits: Thermablok, Aspen Aerogels, DOE.