HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0766.016 2008-2010International Energy Conserfation Code - Hawaii county Ordinaance 09 -48
Murashige, Laura
From:
Sent:
To:
John Parazette [j parazette@hawaiiantel.net]
Thursday, April 01, 2010 5:16 PM
Counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us
Subject: International Energy Conserfation Code - Hawaii county Ordinaance09 -48
Dear Councilmembers
OAt. 234F_/coltU. l
Page 1 of 1
P /Gouni Cn.
i"ED
2010 APR 6 All 7 44
COUh t CLERK
COUNTY i IF HAWAII
As a professional architect, I support Councilmember Naeole - Beason's effort to extend the effective date
of this ordinance to January 11, 2011. The international Energy Conservation Code (IECC) which is
being amended here provides in Sect. 101.5.2, item 2, as in our current Hawaii Model Energy Code
(HMEC), exemption from building envelope requirements for buildings without conditioned spaces;
that is those that are not mechanically heated or cooled. Ordinance no. 09 48 removes that exception
which means that all walls and roof of all structures must be insulated.
There seems to be no recognition of the beneficial effects that natural ventilation can provide. The
HMEC recognizes natural ventilation and exempts walls of structures that do not enclose space that is
air conditioned from insulation requirements (P. 3 -10). There are descriptions within the HMEC of
acceptable means of providing ventilation. Given the fact that we are usually building on sloping
ground on the side of tall mountains, there is always air movement, even on the Lee side due to the
diurnal wind patterns; up -slope during the day, down at night. Wall insulation should not be a general
requirement; the un- amended IECC and the HMEC have that part right.
By removing the exemption for unconditioned spaces, it appears that industrial buildings would
likewise require wall insulation; is that intended? Shipping costs for insulation are a huge factor; this
material is light and fluffy and is shipped at a cubage rate. Cost for insulating all exterior walls would
be disproportionally higher than on mainland in areas where heating is common and it may really be
needed.
Provisions for controlling heat gain through the roof are certainly appropriate however roof color as a
measure of solar absorptance doesn't appear to be as well addressed as in the HMEC. And while the
addition of 402.1.1.1 offers more options for roof /ceiling systems, further study or editing may be
indicated; item 6. on page 4 says "...a cool roof shall have an infrared emittance of no more than 0.75..."
and then below states "A cool roof has (should have)...a high emittance... "which is correct; cool roofs
are commonly between 0.80 and 0.90.
1 respectfully recommend that the effective date of Ordinance 09 -48 be extended as requested and would
hope that further study and opportunity for study and input by local professionals might reduce the
impact and looming costs of this measure.
Respectfully submitted
John Parazette
Licensed Architect A 5225
4/6/2010
Comm. No " 1G(o•)(0
Ref. To: 211444(..i
Ref. Date . APR 0 7 2010