silkwj

ballengerm,

I looked into this a little more. 15 kWh/m2/yr is the limit for just the heating load, and the same limit is on the cooling load as well. So you get 15 for each, not 15 total. Cooling is not mentioned on the websites but if you look into the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP, the excel file used to verify passive house certification) you will find that the limit for the cooling load is 15 kWh/m2/year, in addition to the 15 you get for heating.

I was at this forum as well. I was hoping for a real knock-down, drag-out show but that wasn't the case. There's some reporting on it at BuildingGreen.com, http://www.buildinggreen.com/live/index.cfm/2009/3/16/NESEAs-LEED-Debate-Least-informative-forum-yet

While I don't agree 100% with the way in which Henry Gifford and those who work closely with are attacking LEED & USGBC, I do agree that the system is seriously flawed, both in design and the way in which it's being applied by designers and adopted into legislation without verification. But it does take an extreme point of view to call attention to just about anything these days, so I'm glad that Henry and others are making noise - and it's being heard.

Regarding the passivhaus info in the previous post, there are some errors that should be corrected. The 15 kWh/m2/year is in fact heating only, *not* including cooling, fans, pumps, etc. There is another requirement of 120 kWh/m2/year of primary energy which includes all these other uses of energy. Also, the conversion to sqft is wrong, 15 kWh/m2/year is 1.4 kWh/sqft/year, or about 4750 Btu/sqft/year. (Now I just hope that my conversions are correct!).

Anyone interested in the PH approach should check out http://www.passivehouse.us/