CEED Becomes First Public School to Use Passivhaus Technology in the U.S.

By Torrey Sims (04/18/2012)

The Center of Energy Efficient Design in Rocky Mount, Va., is the first public school to use the energy-efficient Passivhaus technology, which has enabled it to use 68 percent less energy than conventional schools. Passivhaus technology came about when Professors Bo Adamson of Sweden and Wolfgang Feist of Germany reviewed the U.S. building methods of the 1970s and saw energy efficiency could be achieved in simpler ways. “What Passivhaus technology is, is basically a building-physics methodology for modeling the energy performance of buildings very accurately and fairly easily,” said Adam Cohen, co-founder of Structures Design Build and a certified Passivhaus planner in North America and Europe. Passivhaus primarily consists of high levels of insulation and air-tightness in the fabric used in buildings, according to Building Research Establishment. In CEED’s first year, the 3,503-square-foot building consumed 10,050 kilowatt-hours of energy — 5.9 percent more efficient than predicted when the building opened in November 2010. A typical code building of its size would have consumed 33,852 kilowatt-hours of energy. “We knew Passivhaus technology would deliver on results, but it’s always gratifying to get a year’s worth of data to see how accurate the predictions turn out,” Cohen said. “It’s clear this relatively new technology is here to stay.” CEED was designed as a demonstration school to show students and future developers Passivhaus’ impact on design when it comes to sustainability and cost-saving results. “The idea is that the CEED building will be a central piece of the teaching in this county,” Cohen said. “The other piece of this that’s really cool is that the teachers are going to take all the lesson plans from the CEED and put it on the Web for any teacher, anywhere in the world to access. They can use the real-time data of the building, in terms of energy saved and water conserved, in their lessons.” Spreading the Word Although the U.S. has only a little more than 100 buildings with Passivhaus technology, the method has been internationally praise and is now recognized as a green building standard in Europe. More than 30,000 residential, educational and commercial buildings there use Passivhaus. “A few years after these buildings are being built and they start performing, people look at it and go, oh, golly maybe those things really do work,” Cohen said. “We’re starting to get data back and see that yes, we are seeing 70 percent energy savings, then what happens in almost every country is you have this tremendous growth in interest and implementation of Passivhaus. People can’t get enough of it after they realize that it actually works.” Energy Efficient Installations Passivhaus supports energy-efficient installations, Cohen said, but usually at a smaller scale that results in higher energy savings and lower installation costs than typical energy-efficient buildings have. “Typically, on most of the Passivhaus projects — at the very least we’re using is a passive geothermal loop,” Cohen said. “The geothermal loop consists of a geothermal pipe buried underground that uses natural ground air instead of a typical heat pump.” Passivhaus leads to high indoor air quality, low energy use and, in most cases, energy savings of 70 percent more than a standard building method. The idea is spreading in the U.S. to more than just CEED. Cohen is also in the process of completing the Malcolm Rosenberg Hillel at Virginia Tech. The Rosenberg Hillel is set to open in the spring or summer of 2012 and will host activities, classes and prayer. “Pretty much every building that I’ve done so far I’ve had to introduce people to the idea and convince them that it’s a good idea,” Cohen said. “But I feel like that’s changing because people are starting to get the idea and I’m starting to get calls from people around the country who are doing larger projects and I’m consulting on those.”

16th Annual Passivhaus Conference

The 16th Annual Passivhaus Conference is starting next week. I cannot wait to attend. I will be surrounded by building nerd colleagues from all over the world! Imagine a weekend of nothing but folks who care passionately about building physics and the environment. Heaven!

I will also be presenting a paper on the US Commercial Passivhaus Industry, which I will post once available.

Tune in later for updates.

~~ Cheers!

April 25th - Dublin

I will be presenting the case for the economics of Passivhaus @ the Better Building Conference in Dublin on Wed. April 25th.

A Passivhaus Lecture @ Ryerson University

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K6gVBG3ZUKQ

My Presentation @ This Years National Con

Check it out!!

Dr. Feist on Passivhaus

Passivhaus

Building in Harare, Zimbabwe mimics termite mounds to maintain nearly constant temperature.

Biomimicry’s Cool Alternative: Eastgate Centre in Zimbabwe The Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, typifies the best of green architecture and ecologically sensitive adaptation. The country’s largest office and shopping complex is an architectural marvel in its use of biomimicry principles. The mid-rise building, designed by architect Mick Pearce in conjunction with engineers at Arup Associates, has no conventional air-conditioning or heating, yet stays regulated year round with dramatically less energy consumption using design methods inspired by indigenous Zimbabwean masonry and the self-cooling mounds of African termites!

Termites in Zimbabwe build gigantic mounds inside of which they farm a fungus that is their primary food source. The fungus must be kept at exactly 87 degrees F, while the temperatures outside range from 35 degrees F at night to 104 degrees F during the day. The termites achieve this remarkable feat by constantly opening and closing a series of heating and cooling vents throughout the mound over the course of the day. With a system of carefully adjusted convection currents, air is sucked in at the lower part of the mound, down into enclosures with muddy walls, and up through a channel to the peak of the termite mound. The industrious termites constantly dig new vents and plug up old ones in order to regulate the temperature.

The Eastgate Centre, largely made of concrete, has a ventilation system which operates in a similar way. Outside air that is drawn in is either warmed or cooled by the building mass depending on which is hotter, the building concrete or the air. It is then vented into the building’s floors and offices before exiting via chimneys at the top. The complex also consists of two buildings side by side that are separated by an open space that is covered by glass and open to the local breezes.

Air is continuously drawn from this open space by fans on the first floor. It is then pushed up vertical supply sections of ducts that are located in the central spine of each of the two buildings. The fresh air replaces stale air that rises and exits through exhaust ports in the ceilings of each floor. Ultimately it enters the exhaust section of the vertical ducts before it is flushed out of the building through chimneys.

The Eastgate Centre uses less than 10% of the energy of a conventional building its size. These efficiencies translate directly to the bottom line: Eastgate’s owners have saved $3.5 million alone because of an air-conditioning system that did not have to be implemented. Outside of being eco-efficient and better for the environment, these savings also trickle down to the tenants whose rents are 20 percent lower than those of occupants in the surrounding buildings.

Who would have guessed that the replication of designs created by termites would not only provide for a sound climate control solution but also be the most cost-effective way for humans to function in an otherwise challenging context?

Read more: Green Building in Zimbabwe Modeled After Termite Mounds Eastgate Center Harare Zimbabwe Africa sustainable architecture biomimicry termite mound construction natural cooling ventilation – Inhabitat - Green Design Will Save the World

Presentation @ Passive House Northwest Conference

Views From the Front Lines

Recently, the Passivhaus community in the US has been stirred by a split between the PHI (Passivhaus Institute, Germany) and the PHIUS (Passive House Institute US). As a dedicated supporter of the standard and as one whom has discussed the intricacies of the standard as well as the politics with both sides I thought a chance to put my two cents in may help others dealing with this issue.

FIRST and foremost, for those of us determined to make a difference in the way we build in the US that have found logic and intelligence in the Passivhaus methodology, this split is irrelevant. Our goal is in creating buildings that perform as designed to a much higher level of both function and longevity then is standard in the US now. The appealing thing about the PH methodology is that it is a numbers and physics based system that is not prescriptive, but rather scientifically based. So the thing that attracted me and I am sure many others is the validated and repeatable performance of buildings that use this system.

I have been asked over the past few days by many of my colleagues, where does that leave us. It leaves us in the same place we were prior to this occurrence... US pioneers in creating high performance buildings. This movement was never about a certificate or a plaque. It is all about performing as designed, designing intelligently to create beautiful, affordable and low energy projects, and leading the way out of the morass that the US building industry has been stuck in since Reagan took the solar panels off the white house and had his Saudi friends flood the market with $1 gasoline!

So where does that leave us as Passivhaus Pioneers. Well truthfully the same place we were. PHIUS will still be pre-certifiying projects, as I assume PHI will. I have found that one of the most useful items offered by PHIUS is the per-certification of projects. Having a knowledgeable and competent colleague verify and challenge your calculations prior to construction is an invaluable service. As a lone pracitioner in an isolated part of the Blue Ridge of Virginia, having access to the folks at PHIUS has been invaluable to me.

Now here i must level an honest critique that both PHIUS and PHI share. Both organisations are victims of there own success and we all have shared the frustration of trying to get timely answers out of them. I have been in contact with both organisations over the past few years and both are equally guilty of terrible customer relations, with inquiries going unacknowledged and support when it does come being abbreviated. After getting to know both organisations, i realize that both are swamped and can't keep up with the requests, also i know both are supposed to be working on this, but in my opinion, it is the one that solves this support problem most effectively that will gain the most momentum in the US.

BACK to the item at hand - the split. There are many reasons for the split, but first and foremost in my opinion it is a conflict of misunderstanding and strong personalities. The Germans think in a way that is different from the US and the ability to both hear and act on each others differences seems to be lacking. I could see this schism coming over a year ago and i advised both the US and German players that splitting publicly when the movement was just gaining it's footing would only hurt the goals that all of us share. The truth is that both sides agreed, but each also had strong opinions, built up over years, of the other that was very difficult to overcome.

There is nothing in my heart but admiration and warmth for Dr. Feist and Kat Klingenberg. Without both of their unyielding efforts the Passivhaus standard would not be achieving the success it is today. I am confident that both of them, as well as others involved, truly and completely have the same goal in focus... unfortunately there is strong disagreement as to the best method of reaching this goal in the US market, and that has left us where we are today.

It is my fervent hope that as time goes, these wounds will heal. The way will open as the US Passivhaus market matures, that both parties will find the way forward and honor the respect for each other that I know they hold.

In the mean time, Passivhausers (Hausi) keep the nose down and the feet forward. This movement is up to us to make or break! It is not about titles, organisations, certificates or plaques, IT IS ABOUT PERFORMANCE. The physics are there to understand and as a community if we support each other and try our best to vet projects and create high quality work the success will happen.

This will seem like a minor issue in the years to come.

CHEERS to all -- Adam

Passivhaus Conference Wrap up By Dr. Feist

Reposted from Jetsongreen
It’s no secret that Passivhaus, or Passive House, is exploding in popularity right now. This site is publishing more about Passive House every week and readers seem to be more interested in these ultra-efficient homes than ever. In fact, the volume of news references for “Passive House” and “Passivhaus” is up in recent years, according to a simple search using Google Trends.

So, what’s the secret behind the success of Passive House?

Dr. Wolfgang Feist, professor at the University of Innsbruck and founder of the Passivhaus Institut in Germany, explains in Passive Houses – The Secrets why this standard has become the “yardstick for the measurement of sustainable construction.”

1. Realized Projects. There are thousands of Passive House projects around the world. Many have open documents in support of performance accomplishments.

2. Tried and Tested. Passive Houses deliver tremendous energy savings and the results are demonstrated in tons of monitored examples.

3. Life Cycle Affordability. These homes achieve their energy savings through careful design and smart construction, not expensive gadgetry. The savings add up at the front and over time.

4. Best Indoor Air Quality. Passive Houses have great ventilation systems and will provide top-notch indoor air quality without using much energy.

5. No Metering. Some homes will use more energy in a month than a Passive House might use in a year. The energy use is so small, it may not pay to meter energy use.

6. Openly Learnable. The Passive House standard requires study and learning, but it’s not a secret or complicated program. Those that put in the time will pick it up.

7. Best Thermal Comfort. These houses are bright, clean, and comfortable with less drafts and temperature differences.

8. Architecturally Advantageous. Passive Houses can be architecturally significant and energy saving at the same time. The program doesn’t mandate a certain style, it requires airtight construction and a low-energy design.

Construction and Monitoring of the First US Passivhaus Public School Building

Here is the text of the paper I presented in Austria @ the International Passivhaus Conference:

Construction and Monitoring of the First US Passivhaus Public School Building

Construction and Monitoring of the First US Passivhaus Public School Building

Here is the text of the paper I presented in Austria @ the International Passivhaus Conference:

Construction and Monitoring of the First US Passivhaus Public School Building

International Passivhaus Conference

I am sitting in the airport waiting for my final flight on the return from the International Passivhaus Conference. I'd like to share some quick observations:

1) We (the US) are far behind in both technology and know how in a field that we lead 30 years ago - Energy efficient construction.
2) The US market has very little interest in pursuing such things and as such it will take legislation to really move it forward. alas I am afraid this is still a decade or more away.
3) Countries that understand the future markets of the world are adopting this technology aggressively. I was at the meeting last conference one year ago when the Korean delegation made the agreement for official recognition. Within the last year they have built both residential and non-residential projects, already have a Korean made PHI certified window (there are none in the US after at least three years of begging) and they are breaking ground on three apartment towers (20 stories) of Passivhaus construction, those are only the ones I know of. They have also adopted Passivhaus as the energy design system for all buildings by 2017. They know where the future is.
4) China is aggressively pursuing at least 2 large scale PH mixed use developments.
5) Even small Latvia has PH certified components being made in their country.

How long will we continue to hide our collective heads in the sand as the world embraces this century and we are longing for the 1960's. It may be time to find a more forward thinking forum for those of us that have beaten our heads against the US ignorance for so many years.

~~ Cheers - Adam

USGBC and Passive House Alignment

The US Green Building Council (USGBC) and Passive House Institute US (PHIUS) have released the following letter of alignment:

USGBC’s LEED for Homes rating system and Passive House standard are complimentary green building systems. Both programs share the goal of making the US building stock more efficient, comfortable and sustainable places to live. While the Passive House standard focuses primarily on greatly reducing the heating and cooling loads of the home, LEED for Homes also promotes efficient material use, site selection and development, and rewards projects that improve their water efficiency and indoor air quality.

A Passive House is a very well‐insulated, virtually air‐tight building that is primarily heated by passive solar gain and by internal gains from people, electrical equipment, etc. Energy losses are minimized. Any remaining heat demand is provided by an extremely small source. Avoidance of heat gain through shading and window orientation also helps to limit any cooling load, which is similarly minimized. An energy recovery ventilator provides a constant, balanced fresh air supply. The result is an impressive system that not only saves up to 90% of space heating costs, but also provides terrific indoor air quality.

LEED for Homes is a national, voluntary certification system, developed by national experts and experienced builders, that promotes the design and construction of high‐performance green homes and encourages the adoption of sustainable practices by the homebuilding industry.

LEED certification is based on 18 prerequisites and 67 credits across 8 credit categories. Beyond energy and indoor air quality, LEED for Homes also takes into consideration material selection, water use, site selection/landscaping, location to local amenities/mass transit and homeowner education.

USGBC works regularly with Passive House Institute US (PHIUS) representatives to further green home building nationwide. USGBC and PHIUS agree that building and certifying a Passive House is a seamless compliance path for LEED for Homes Energy and Atmosphere section, and that homes are beginning to achieve dual certifications. In fact, USGBC is exploring the incorporation of the Passive House Standard into future iterations of the LEED for Homes program.

Reducing a building’s heating energy use by 70 to 90 percent can be achieved with three basic ingredients: (1) highly insulated walls and windows, (2

Reducing a building’s heating energy use by 70 to 90 percent can be achieved with three basic ingredients: (1) highly insulated walls and windows, (2) a tightly sealed envelope, and (3) heat recovery ventilation. Not rocket science, but common sense applications of the principle of “efficiency first.”

And those are the three key components of “Passivhaus” design, a highly energy efficient building construction standard that has been successfully applied in more than 25,000 buildings in Europe. So far, only a handful have been built in the U.S. You might wonder—as I have written previously—what’s our excuse?

The photo above shows Dan Whitmore’s nearly completed Courtland Place Passive Project, Seattle’s first permanent building designed to the Passivhaus standard (the Mini-B Passive House isn’t a permanent structure).

The mother-in-law unit has been occupied for two months, and according to Whitmore so far the heat was turned on for a grand total of about five minutes on one especially frosty morning in March. Aside from that brief lapse, the excess heat generated by appliances, people, and the sunlight coming through the windows was enough to keep it comfortably warm inside. I can attest that the space was warm, almost too warm, on the partly sunny but cool spring day of the Ecobuilding Guild’s recent green home tour.

And yes, the heat recovery ventilator has to run 24×7 in cold weather when the windows are closed, but it only consumes about as much as a 50 watt light bulb. Whitmore’s house has no furnace—a significant up front cost savings. On the coldest days it can be heated with two small baseboard electric heaters, or by running water from the domestic hot water tank through the heat recovery ventilator.

But is it expensive? A recently completed Passivhaus in Portland reportedly had a 10 percent cost premium over conventional construction (the windows are a major part of that premium). In Germany where contractors have experience with the standard, typical cost premiums run five to eight percent.

But the reduction in energy use provides both a direct cost payback that is guaranteed to sweeten as energy prices inevitably rise, and a public benefit payback from a reduction of the myriad externalized costs associated with energy consumption. And then there’s the potential payback in “green jobs.” What if all those triple pane windows were manufactured locally?

Furthermore, the impact of “efficiency first” strategies like Passivhaus tend to have broad, positive repercussions across systems. For example, would there be any need for a major investment in district heating systems at Yesler Terrace if most of the buildings were designed to the Passivhaus standard? Seattle City Light gives away fluorescent light bulbs for the same underlying reason.

At this stage in the climate change/peak oil game, projects like Whitmore’s Passivhaus ought to be the norm for new construction. And to help make that happen we desperately need meaningful incentives at the local, State, and Federal levels. Preferably yesterday, please, if not sooner.

Oregon Sets Efficiency Precedent

Oregon Sets Efficiency Precedent:
Passive House Building Energy Standard to be High Level Option Within State Reach Code

SALEM, Ore.—Wednesday (3/16), the Oregon Reach Code Committee unanimously adopted the Passive House Building Energy Standard as an option within the new Reach Code. The Committee, initiated by S.B. 79, is developing an optional, aspirational building code with a two-fold purpose: to incentivize high performance buildings, and to allow jurisdictions & builders to field test state-of-the-art construction methods
The Passive House Building Energy Standard, which cuts energy use by 70-90%, is the world’s most rigorous standard for energy efficiency. Although still relatively new to the U.S., it has been widely practiced and is being phased in as minimum building code in Europe.
“While still only an option within an option, we can all be proud that Oregon has taken this historic step to continue as a leader for the country by including the Passive House Building Energy Standard in the new Oregon Reach Code,” stated Sam Hagerman, President of Portland contractor Hammer and Hand and the national Passive House Alliance. “We applaud the Reach Code Committee for taking this important action towards addressing the climate challenge we face.”
“The Passive House Standard is not only cost effective related to standard construction, these buildings also have superior comfort, health, performance, and durability,” said Stephen Aiguier, President of Portland Design-Build Firm, Green Hammer. “This is a great indication that Oregon is starting to take the steps needed to solve climate change and reduce our dependence on foreign energy.”
The measure garnered strong support, having been endorsed by 14 nonprofit organizations, many individuals, and 29 businesses including Oregon CUB, Oregon Environmental Council, Climate Solutions, Rocky Mountain Institute, and VOIS Business Alliance. Jana Gastellum of Oregon Environmental Council testified in support of the adoption, and the Chair of the Oregon Global Warming Commission sent a letter of support aligning the Passive House Standard with their October 2010 Roadmap to 2020 report calling for greenhouse gas emissions reductions of 80%.
The Reach Committee voted the Passive House Building Energy Standard into a high level of the commercial building portion of the Reach Code (Section 301.1.1) and indicated they will likely do the same for the residential portion when they reach that section in an upcoming session.

Passive house concept drastically reduces energy use

By STEVE RYPKA
GREEN LIVING

This column often explores the exciting transformation taking place in the building industry. Green building programs have grown and multiplied at an amazing rate in recent years. We've looked at Energy Star, LEED and even the Living Building Challenge. These programs are important because they raise the bar and provide real-world examples of what is possible, not just what is permissible. They drive innovation and change.

Each program has its own unique approach but they all share a common goal of creating a better world by improving the built environment. Energy efficiency is a key to every meaningful green building program but one program in particular takes it to an entirely new level of performance. I'm talking about the passive house movement, where energy-use reductions of 90 percent are not uncommon. The term applies to many types of buildings, not just homes.

The passive house concept is a relatively simple blend of ancient wisdom and modern technology. For thousands of years, people have used solar orientation and thermal mass to help keep warmer in winter and cooler in summer. When combined with modern technology that includes super-insulated, air-tight building envelopes and ultra-efficient fresh air ventilation systems, the results are impressive to say the least.

Passive houses are so efficient that the energy they do require can be easily supplied using relatively small photovoltaic and thermal solar arrays for electricity and hot water, respectively. Thus, the goal of carbon-neutral, zero-energy buildings is achieved at minimal cost.

Just how much does a house like this cost? Obviously there is no set answer since most projects of this type are custom and costs vary significantly, but so far the results are promising. Many passive house projects claim minimal construction cost premiums compared to standard construction practices. Considering that the building's operating costs are drastically reduced by the energy savings, it's clear why more people are building to passive house standards.

It takes a very good contractor to build a passive house. Attention to detail and proper product selection is essential. For example, triple-pane, ultra-high-quality windows push the envelope of thermal performance. The building envelope must avoid thermal bridging and incorporate very high levels of insulation, even under the slab.

Specialized energy-recovery ventilation systems replace the typical forced-air heating and cooling equipment found in most homes. The ERV brings in just the right amount of fresh air, preconditioned by the outgoing stale air via a high-efficiency heat exchanger. At that point, small amounts of additional heat or cooling is added as necessary. The result is a draft-free, quiet and comfortable living space filled with plenty of healthy, fresh air.

The passive house certification program started in Germany. There have been tens of thousands built in Europe and it's no wonder since their energy costs are higher. My last column discussed higher energy prices. Passive house construction is a perfect example of how we can live better with less energy, save money and avoid the distress of rising energy costs.

It's good to know that people are developing solutions to our most pressing issues, yet we must push strongly for rapid change. We've already lost the battle to avoid climate change. We're only beginning to feel the effects and they will intensify over time.

Mitigation is still important, but so is adaptation. Deep green building programs like passive house provide a solution that addresses both. We can reduce our carbon footprint while creating structures that are much better suited to the challenges of a changing world.

There's much more to the story, including how we can adopt passive house concepts to our huge inventory of existing homes and buildings. I invite you to explore these ideas and prepare for the inevitable change we must all face. It might turn out to be the best investment you'll ever make.

Steve Rypka is a green living consultant and president of GreenDream Enterprises, a company committed to helping people live lighter on the planet. For more information and links to additional resources relating to this column, or to reach Steve, please visit www.greendream.biz.