Introduction (adapted): In
September 2013, ASHRAE past President William P.
Bahnfleth created the Residential Construction
Ad Hoc Committee to investigate the role that
ASHRAE has played, could play, and should play
with respect to the residential HVAC and
construction market.
The
committee found that ASHRAE has extensive and
perhaps unmatched technical abilities in the
residential area, but it is far from the
dominant player in the sector. ASHRAE
involvement requires not only focusing the
efforts of its own volunteers but collaborating
with existing stakeholders. The ad hoc
determined that ASHRAE can take a larger
leadership role in the residential sector, a
role that both benefits the sector and enhances
ASHRAE’s mission. Details can be found in the
body of the
report.
Can ASHRAE become the great
enabler?
How the society might empower
other residential stake holders and their
initiatives has yet to be fleshed out in detail
but within its
core values, "ASHRAE seeks and
embraces collaborative efforts with
organizations, agencies, and individuals sharing
our commitment to sustainable built
environments." In support of this value, “ASHRAE
is committed to the highest
ethical standards.
We work transparently, observing essential
requirements for due process and peer reviews to
assure our members and stakeholders that we do
the right things the right way.” I'll go
out on a limb here and say few would
disagree, peer reviews and ethical standards are
not found throughout the world of housing in the
same density found within the engineering and
other professional communities.
Certainly at the core of
engineering professionalism
held by ASHRAE members is
the risk of losing one’s ability to practice if
found guilty of unprofessionalism by one’s peers.
Triggering a practice review is typically an avenue not afforded
consumers in resolving conflict within the
residential sector. However with this level of
societal expectation comes universal support of mandatory
competencies within the academics
and practice of science, technology, engineering
and mathematics (STEM) which stands at the core
of engineering and construction. Though the
residential sector has representation within the
foregoing scope it historically is populated
with members with a focus on the manufacturing
and assembly of building materials regulated by
minimum
requirements of building codes. As such the residential market has by necessity a
trade based
focus on the “how”
whereas ASHRAE historically has had a very
strong science based
focus on the “why”.
Regrettably the “how” has been
established by society (read Governments) as the lowest allowable
grade before an inspector is obligated to
declare failure in a product and/or system.
Obviously the focus on “why” drives a different
level of understanding and within this dialogue,
the establishment of ASHRAE Standards based on,
“…education, technical information and all other
activities and products (reflecting) the best
practices that lead our industry.” Best
practice defined by Standards and Guidelines are
not universally a prerequisite in building codes
nor is it mandatory to expect its appearance
during the design, installation and inspections
of
indoor climate systems in homes. Given the contrasting tension between the
two spectrums one could choose to see only the
difficulties in a relationship involving ASHRAE
core values operating in a minimum based system
or one could see how this could be used to
further enable initiatives by
collaborating organizations driven to bring
awareness and changes to the residential sector.
What does this mean for
consumers?
As ASHRAE figures out a path
forward in engaging the residential sector,
discerning educated consumers must play an
active role prior to engaging in final contract
negotiations with housing service
providers (architects, builders, suppliers, trades etc.) by opening up
early design stage dialogue around ASHRAE
residential Standards related to thermal comfort
(Standard 55), indoor air quality (Standard
62.2) and energy efficiency (Standard 90.2)
and their interactions (Guideline
10). The
implication here is there is no current broad
sweeping enforcement of all four docuements since
they (unless enforced by the authority having
jurisdiction) exceed the minimum
requirements of most residential codes. Translation:
consumers who don’t want their homes constructed
to minimum requirements must engage a higher
level of professionalism for design counselling
and project services, i.e. with those operating
under the umbrella of “why” and in this authors
opinion, independently of those operating under
the umbrella of “how”. Why? Because the
majority of those responsible for residential
construction practices are not familiar with nor
are they required to know why they should apply,
measure and commission systems to meet ASHRAE
residential Standards.
Without a doubt consumers must be
cautioned here since engaging in these
discussion will bring resistance by some
providers who will state (for example) that
their homes are comfortable by the nature of
their respective program yet the majority of
program providers cannot describe (for example)
the
prerequisites for thermal comfort nor the
means of measuring it as defined by (for
example) ASHRAE Standard 55.
Would working with ASHRAE
Standards mean higher cost to consumers?
Only in comparison to minimum
requirements will homes built using ASHRAE
Standards using ASHRAE professionals translate
to marginally higher costs. The operative phrase
of importance is, “in comparison to minimum
requirements” since thermal comfort, ventilation
and energy efficiency Standards require a
stricter adhesion to scientific principles in
support of health, comfort and sustainability.
This is another way of stating that if building
codes enforced the Standards costs would be
associated with better residential construction
practices. Alternatively it can be restated that
consumers who are not willing to be active
participants will have someone else define for
them the quality of the indoor environment and
the quantity of energy used and this will be
done by the builder, trades and suppliers so as to be competitive in
field defined by the lowest of bench marks.
Last thoughts…
Just because someone can design,
install and commission an MRI machine doesn't
make them a doctor. Likewise just because
someone can design, install and commission an
HVAC system does not make them an indoor climate
consultant. Having ASHRAE and its members
actively participate in the housing industry by
working with ASHRAE residential Standards
based on the "why" can only help those consumers actively seeking
to obtain higher quality residential
designs, installations and inspections of
indoor
climate systems. There can be no doubt, the
operative word is "actively" since at the moment ASHRAE can’t help those who play a
passive role simply because the status quo
process of building homes to a minimum
requirement is
embedded too deep within the housing culture.
Know that shifting a culture of Code based
buildings to adopt all residential ASHRAE Standards
will not come easily if at all, but consumers
ought to know there
is at least options available and options in the
form of consumer dollars can have a way of shifting
attitudes.
