The votes have been counted and while some folks will be happy with the results, others are very disappointed. No, we’re not talking about the presidential election, but about the Online Governmental Consensus Vote that will determine the content of the 2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).
Every three years, hundreds of building industry members from states across the nation convene to develop the next U.S. model building energy code via a consensus process held by the International Code Council. The process, which includes code officials, architects, engineers, product manufacturers, builders and energy efficiency advocates, is designed to ensure that modern-day technology and building practices are incorporated into the current model building code. This year, some members of the residential code committee were more focused on lowering costs for home builders than improving energy efficiency of homes. As a result, the 2018 IECC has the potential to be significantly weaker than its previous iterations.
A significant proposal before Congress would require proposed energy code changes to be evaluated for their cost-effectiveness prior to inclusion in a code. The proposal before Congress designates simple payback as the principal basis for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of proposed energy code changes, but two other methods for determining cost-effectiveness are Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and Mortgage Cash-Flow (MCF).
In a deal nearly two years in the making, the International Code Council (ICC) and ASHRAE have signed the final agreement that outlines each organization’s role in the development and maintenance of the new version of the International Green Construction Code (IgCC).
There was a lot of buzz around the residential provisions in the 2015 IECC last year but not enough around the commercial provisions. Major changes in commercial buildings for the 2015 IECC include increased commissioning and upgrades for HVAC, water heating, and lighting.
Who remembers logging onto AOL using the old dial-up modems? I am sure you can hear it now. It seemed like a good idea at the time and got the job done, but in in retrospect, the process seems comically slow and inefficient. You could say the same about the state of the model building code development process. This year, however, we usher in a new way of doing things: cdpACCESS.
Last November, ICC rolled out is much-anticipated solution – a remote voting system called “cdpACCESS.” The new cloud-based online tool has the game-changing potential to broaden participation by GMVRs to literally tens of thousands, a far cry from the hundreds who have cast final action votes on ICC’s 15 I-Codes.
Sound energy policy prevailed as local and state governmental officials rejected dozens of builder-sponsored home efficiency rollback proposals in a three-day marathon meeting convened by the International Code Council (ICC) to develop the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).
The votes that will have the most profound impact on national energy and environmental policy this year were not held in Washington or a state capital, but by governmental officials assembled by the International Code Council (ICC) in Charlotte, NC,” said William Fay, Executive Director of the broad-based Energy Efficient Codes Coalition (EECC).