Page 29 - CodeWatcher Winter 2017 Issue
P. 29
Proposed changes to the IECC, that increase To support this change, ICC could require that each
efficiency, can also be considered reactive because code change proposal provide actual estimated
the goal of an efficient building is to reduce carbon savings for each proposed change.
emissions.
A separate review committee, similar to a state
Unfortunately this argument often does not Technical Advisory Group, could be convened that
resonate with many members of the code development would review all code change proposals and applicable
committee or the ICC voting members, which leads energy saving estimates, prior to the committee
to disapproving many viable, cost effective proposals. hearings. Proposals would be scored based on energy
The IECC does not contain energy saving goals savings estimates, with only proposals that offer viable
similar to that of Washington State, which sets energy savings, or that that increase compliance
goals for residential and nonresidential construction without decreasing the efficiency of the code, being
permitted under the 2031 state energy code of a 70 heard by the code development committee.
percent reduction in annual net energy consumption
(compared to the 2006 state energy code). Adding an extra step would slightly increase the
length of the code development process but would
A Path Forward reduce the number of proposals that were specifically
focused on reducing the efficiency of the code and
O PTIONS ARE AVAILABLE to change the format reduce the length of the IECC Code Development
of the IECC and the code development Hearings and Public Comment Hearings.
process to ensure consistent savings in each
new version of the code. The result from the current IECC code development
The first change is to include language in the IECC process is unpredictable at best, and unless there is
that requires that each edition of the IECC must be no a change to the current code development process
less than X percent more efficient than the previous that includes setting a savings threshold for each code
version. The percent increase could either be set development cycle, predictable energy savings will
by the ICC Board of Directors or through the code not be achieved.
development process.
Developing energy codes that achieve no energy
A new Section 100-Code Development placed in savings serves no purpose and represents a missed
the Scope and Administration section, would dictate opportunity to advance efficiency in new buildings
incremental savings for future versions of the IECC. that will ultimately lead to energy independence and
a reduction in greenhouse gases. CW
“Developing energy codes with little or negative
savings will slow progress toward meeting
efficiency goals, become a disincentive for
states to adopt the code ... and result in more
resources being spent to increase the efficiency of
the energy code in an effort to meet efficiency
mandates required by state statutes.”
www.codewatcher.us January 2017 / CodeWatcher 29
