[Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans (UNCLASSIFIED)

[Eurek, John S NWO]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Wow, most of the things in the article you attached came straight from the
U.N. Agenda 21 (worth looking into)  It is a brave new world out there and
Agenda 21 spells it out.  As I learn about Agenda 21 I keep thinking 'Listen
to people, they usually tell you what they are planning.' 

Green is the new Red.




"Is Freedom is a small price to pay to stop Global Warming?"

John Eurek PE, LEED AP

-----Original Message-----
From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Varkie C
Thomas
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 3:58 PM
To: Pasha Korber-Gonzalez
Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans

 

Check out the article in

http://bepan.info/articles <http://bepan.info/articles> 

2 - VCT - Mechanical-Design and Percent-Energy-Savings
<http://bepan.info/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/2_-_VCT_-_Mechanical-Design_a
nd_Percent-Energy-Savings.167125605.pdf> 

The title is misleading.  It is my polite way of saying that USGBC, GBCI,
LEED and other idealistic, ignorant and bureaucratic groups are forcing
experienced architects and engineers into screwing up building design.   LEED
is not mandatory but it cannot be ignored because clients have been
brainwashed into believing that it will save the planet.  Here are some
extracts:

----------------------------------------------

Percent energy savings can vary with the type of building and the location.
Some types of buildings (like the Middle-School + Community-Center (MCC) in
the suburbs example) can exceed Std90 by 50% or more.  The High-Rise
Mixed-Use (HRMU) building in an urban area is an example where achieving 5%
to 10% energy savings represents good, reliable and safe design that will not
cause maintenance and replacement problems in the future.  See

http://bepan.info/proj-bldgs/p12-middle-school

http://bepan.info/proj-bldgs/p13-high-rise-bldg

One fixed percent rating system for ranking all types of buildings and
climates is like using the same yardstick to measure the performance of
classical violinist and a professional wrestler.

Just because a high rise office building in an urban area does not get a
"pass" or "no" certification from LEED based on percent energy savings, does
not mean that it is not well designed for optimum energy and functionality
compared to a single level school located in a suburban area that receives
"platinum" LEED certification.  

USGBC LEED rating system has created the impression among the public,
including City, County, State and Federal authorities, that building quality
can be measured by the LEED rating system.  Architects, engineers and
building developers are now under pressure from the green (meaning ignorant)
public and other environmental idealists to get LEED certification.

The building design business is almost 100% labor.  US
Architectural-Engineering design fees for large projects have been going down
because of increased competition at home and particularly from overseas where
wages are lower.  The client and the public now expect every building to be
LEED certified otherwise it is not up to standard.  The quality of building
design is now measured by the green /ignorant public by its LEED
certification.  The design cost has increased because the public has been
brainwashed into believing that LEED certifies the level of building
superiority in terms of saving energy and the environment. 

The impact of USGBC and LEED on energy (percent energy savings over Std90)
and the environment (imported bamboo flooring saves the environment in the
US; collecting rainwater regardless of whether the location has wet a
climate, with rivers and lakes; roof gardens on top a high-rise building with
little roof space, etc.) is questionable.  

 

The LEED regulations and requirements keep expanding and gets more detailed
and bureaucratic with time.  AE firms now require a new type of specialized
expert called the LEED Professional which did not exist before.  It has added
to the time and cost of AE design while design fees keep going down.  It has
also added to building construction costs. The end result is a building that
is completely screwed.

Increasing social affluence in the way buildings are used, indirectly
nullifies the impact of Building Energy Codes.  Building energy use per
person in the US is increasing exponentially.  Affluence has also resulted in
more indirect building energy use per person by way of transportation.  The
following are guesstimates for the US. In reality it might be much worse.
Housing in 1950 for a family of 4 was about 1,500 sf.  Today it is about
3,000 sf.  In 1950 the use of public transportation was common and people
lived close to the place where they worked.  

Today people live as far away as possible from work and drive oversized large
luxury autos (one occupant per vehicle) to and from work during the same rush
hour time, resulting traffic jams which add to the commuting time and auto
idle time when the vehicle uses fuel but does not move.  Affluence has also
resulted in families owning a second vacation home as far away as possible
from their primary home.  They might use this home for about a month during
the year in summer.  In winter vacation home has to heated to prevent the
pipes from freezing.  There is also the cost of transportation to and from
the vacation homes.  Those who do not have second homes use hotels.

 


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE