 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
What's Happening from BuildingGreen.com
October 17, 2008
Uncertain Future for ASHRAE Standard 189
Note: This article, first published on October 17, 2008, was updated on October 29. What was supposed to be a new minimum, code-enforceable standard for green buildings now faces an uncertain future. In a move that came as a surprise to its partners, the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) has disbanded the committee that has been developing “Proposed Standard 189: Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings.” Together with the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES), ASHRAE has been working since 2006 on the standard. Based on the USGBC’s LEED Rating System, Standard 189-P is designed to be incorporated into building codes, unlike LEED, which is a voluntary system. The first draft available for public comment was released early in 2007, and the committee has been making regular progress (see EBN Vol. 16, No. 6). That was until October 14, 2008, when William Harrison, president of ASHRAE, informed the members of the committee, which is known formally as SPC 189.1P, that they were in the process of being “cleared.” Harrison invited those individuals to reapply for membership in a reconstituted committee. In the letter to the committee, which was obtained by EBN, Harrison also noted the resignation days earlier of committee chair John Hogan, AIA, P.E., of the Seattle Department of Planning and Development. Brendan Owens, vice president for LEED Technical Development at USGBC, told EBN that it was “very surprised at this action taken by ASHRAE,” adding that USGBC is trying to learn more about ASHRAE’s reasons. “We want to make sure that this is the best path forward,” Owens said. Acknowledging the uncertainty about Standard 189, Owens noted that a minimum green building standard that can be incorporated into codes is “so fundamental to everything USGBC is about, we are very committed to making sure it happens.” Several committee members discussed the move with EBN, all of them speaking off the record, either because they were unauthorized to speak by the organizations they work for, or did not want to jeopardize their chances to rejoin the committee. Discussing resistance from various industry groups, including steel, gas and utilities, wood, and building owner interests, one committee member said, “We must have been doing a good job.” While those trade associations had specific complaints in some cases, in others they were unsupportive of ASHRAE’s involvement, as a mechanical engineering association, in a broad green building standard. According to Jeff Littleton, executive vice president for ASHRAE, it is important, in terms of American National Standards Institute (ANSI) process rules, that “we have all materially affected parties at the table.” One anonymous source echoed this perspective, staying that ASHRAE expected that the standard would be appealed on procedural grounds, a process that could potentially hold it up for years. By reconstituting the committee now with additional committee members, ASHRAE may hope to move more efficiently toward completion. EBN also learned that ASHRAE did seek to simply expand the committee prior to taking this more drastic action, but Hogan and others on the committee resisted that expansion, with the stated concern that having a larger committee would slow the process.
DISCUSSIONSReader-contributed comments related to BuildingGreen.com - Uncertain Future for ASHRAE Standard 189. Comments are listed with newest at the top.
ASHRAE 189
Posted by
Michael McGill
on Oct 20, 2008, 11:17 PM
This smacks of the Bush Administration's manipulation of what needs to be done in favor of some special interests who are interested in their own profits over the greater good. I am thoroughly disappointed that ASHRAE gave in to the pressure...or do they have some stake in the latest tack. Hopefully we are on the brink of a new national approach to doing the right thing when it comes to preserving thousands of species including possibly ourselves. Short sighted business people don't see the future (look at the US auto industry) and are not nimble enough to recreate themselves. They are bound to die in the new economy. Why allow them to influence the future and delay the inevitable at grave risk. Who is actually profiting here from this decision?
This smacks of the Bush Administration's manipulation of what needs to be done in favor of some special interests who are interested in their own profits over the greater good. I am thoroughly disappointed that ASHRAE gave in to the pressure...or do they have some stake in the latest tack. Hopefully we are on the brink of a new national approach to doing the right thing when it comes to preserving thousands of species including possibly ourselves. Short sighted business people don't see the future (look at the US auto industry) and are not nimble enough to recreate themselves. They are bound to die in the new economy. Why allow them to influence the future and delay the inevitable at grave risk. Who is actually profiting here from this decision?
Specific objections from trade groups
Posted by
Tristan Korthals Altes
on Oct 20, 2008, 05:19 PM
As we talk with more committee members and other people who are involved, we continue to hear two main story lines. In one story line, which is given on the record by officials from key organizations, the recent developments are an unfortunate, even surprising development, but just a blip in the steady progress toward completion of a good standard.
In the other story line, given off the record by members of the disbanded committee, a process that had been moving steadily, with strong input from many stakeholders, has been brought to a halt by a few trade groups. Some committee members are upset enough about the development that they may not reapply to the committee. It is unclear how many new committee members will be added from previously disaffected groups. Will the balance shift to a weaker standard?
One of the issues has been the potential number of stakeholder groups. ASHRAE usually works on mechanical engineering standards, which have a known set of stakeholders. It is clear that one of the ambitions of Standard 189 is that such a variety of groups is involved. There are many sources of support, but also potential opposition from groups that don't think ASHRAE is within its scope. Several committee members have reported and provided documentation showing that building owners, the gas and electric industries, the steel construction industry, and wood interests have been in the latter category, and may have provided the impetus for ASHRAE to adjust its course.
Some of these concerns may be legitimate and with good intentions. But one committee member shared detailed notes about various groups that sound more like protection of narrow interests, leading to obstructionism.
Steel is strongly opposed to regionality as a basis for evaluation a green material. Utilities have opposed any use of carbon metrics. Gas is concerned about restrictions on certain heating equipment. Wood is opposed to some of the certification requirements.
As we talk with more committee members and other people who are involved, we continue to hear two main story lines. In one story line, which is given on the record by officials from key organizations, the recent developments are an unfortunate, even surprising development, but just a blip in the steady progress toward completion of a good standard.
In the other story line, given off the record by members of the disbanded committee, a process that had been moving steadily, with strong input from many stakeholders, has been brought to a halt by a few trade groups. Some committee members are upset enough about the development that they may not reapply to the committee. It is unclear how many new committee members will be added from previously disaffected groups. Will the balance shift to a weaker standard?
One of the issues has been the potential number of stakeholder groups. ASHRAE usually works on mechanical engineering standards, which have a known set of stakeholders. It is clear that one of the ambitions of Standard 189 is that such a variety of groups is involved. There are many sources of support, but also potential opposition from groups that don't think ASHRAE is within its scope. Several committee members have reported and provided documentation showing that building owners, the gas and electric industries, the steel construction industry, and wood interests have been in the latter category, and may have provided the impetus for ASHRAE to adjust its course.
Some of these concerns may be legitimate and with good intentions. But one committee member shared detailed notes about various groups that sound more like protection of narrow interests, leading to obstructionism.
Steel is strongly opposed to regionality as a basis for evaluation a green material. Utilities have opposed any use of carbon metrics. Gas is concerned about restrictions on certain heating equipment. Wood is opposed to some of the certification requirements.
Committee members outraged
Posted by
Nadav Malin
on Oct 18, 2008, 08:59 AM
Since this article was posted, several committee members told EBN that they don't plan to reapply for membership in the new committee. That suggests that the Standard is likely to change pretty dramatically before it goes out for a next public comment period.
Since this article was posted, several committee members told EBN that they don't plan to reapply for membership in the new committee. That suggests that the Standard is likely to change pretty dramatically before it goes out for a next public comment period.
189 will move ahead, says ASHRAE
Posted by
Tristan Korthals Altes
on Oct 17, 2008, 12:51 PM
Since this article went online, we spoke with Jeff Littleton, the executive v.p. for ASHRAE. He emphasized ASHRAE's intention to reconstitute the committee, potentially with many of the same members and possibly a few additional ones, and to proceed with work on the standard. This process is likely to take 30–45 days, he says. Whether or not the standard continues on its current -- and fairly stringent -- course will be up to the committee.
Since this article went online, we spoke with Jeff Littleton, the executive v.p. for ASHRAE. He emphasized ASHRAE's intention to reconstitute the committee, potentially with many of the same members and possibly a few additional ones, and to proceed with work on the standard. This process is likely to take 30–45 days, he says. Whether or not the standard continues on its current -- and fairly stringent -- course will be up to the committee.
| Log in to add comments - Help with comments |
[ top of page ]
RELATED ARTICLES|
EBN: Newsbrief - June 2007
|
[ top of page ]
RELATED CATEGORIESGREEN TOPICS
[ top of page ]
|
DISCUSSIONS
Tristan Korthals Altes
Oct 22, 2008 RELATED ARTICLES
Standard 189 Released for Comment
EBN: Newsbrief - June 2007 RELATED GREEN DESIGN
|
More comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For readers interested in following further discussion of this issue, we have a parallel blog post with some reader comments here:
http://www.buildinggreen.com/live/index.cfm/2008/10/17/Green-building-code-standard-committee-disbanded