Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: ICC Green Building Code

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
To be fair, Stan didn't argue in favor of trashing the planet or seceding
from the United States.  

Insults aside, what about the construction concerns in his email?  Namely,
should this be a code issue?  Shouldn't engineers be leading these kinds of
discussions, without getting caught in emotions and insults?

Timothy K. Hilton, E.I.
Engineering Intern
 
LHC STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
P.O. Box 10567
1015 Wade Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27605-0567
 
919.832.5587 x 20
thilton(--nospam--at)lhcengineers.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Utzman [mailto:chuckutzman(--nospam--at)gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:53 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: ICC Green Building Code

Stan
Maybe Rick Perry has it right. You, Bill P., et al should secede 
(again).  Here in CA, several private groups have stepped in and created 
their own "green" standards & they are being adopted by local 
jurisdictions.  I have some serious reservations about how well they are 
researched/written. Perhaps IBC can do a better/more rational job & 
provide a consistent set of standards--I guess we'll see.  Meanwhile 
you, Bill, & Jim Inhofe can argue for your "god given" right to trash 
the planet, but last year we had an election & you lost--get over it.
Chuck Utzman, P.E.

Stan Caldwell wrote:
> Call me old-fashioned.  I have always understood that the sole purpose 
> of any model building code is to provide a regulatory framework for 
> public safety.  In fact, the website for the folks behind the IBC 
> family of codes is www.iccsafe.org <http://www.iccsafe.org/>.  As 
> discussed on this Listserv a few years ago, building codes have never 
> addressed aesthetics, economics, serviceability, and so forth.  Public 
> safety has always been their sole focus.
>  
> Now, that all appears to be changing.  On June 29, ICC announced that 
> it is teaming with AIA and ASTM to develop the "International Green 
> Construction Code" (IGCC) focused on new and existing commercial 
> buildings.  In a press release on that date,  Code Council Chief 
> Executive Officer Richard P. Weiland stated "We believe the time has 
> come for us to develop a code that will stand as a useful and credible 
> regulatory framework for creating a greener commercial building 
> stock."  Really, I am not making this stuff up:
>  
> http://www.iccsafe.org/news/nr/2009/0629_IGCC.pdf
>  
> Now, I have no problem with promoting sustainable principles as long 
> as they are based on innovation, best-practices, and proven science. 
>  My wife and I have recycled everything imaginable for the better part 
> of three decades.  We recently replaced all three of our big 
> residential HVAC systems with new equipment that is so efficient that 
> President Obama is funding part of our expenditures with your tax 
> dollars.  [Note:  This is a federal gift, it did not influence our 
> purchase decision.]  With an incentive from the State of Texas, I also 
> recently replaced a few dozen perfectly good incandescent light bulbs 
> with dimmer, goofy-looking compact florescent bulbs.  Some of the 
> engineers on my staff are actively pursuing LEED accreditation.  I 
> applaud that, as we will better be able to serve our clients who 
> voluntarily seek to have their projects LEED-certified.  The key word, 
> of course, is VOLUNTARILY.  
>  
> I have two problems with ICC pursuing the IGCC.  First, if they are 
> truly compelled to venture beyond safety, I would much prefer that 
> they focus on serviceability.  Issues like floor vibration, for 
> example, remain fuzzy areas of structural engineering practice that 
> attract unnecessary liability.  Second, as one who believes that 
> climate science is mostly nonsense, I oppose any effort that will lead 
> to sustainability regulations being embedded into the building codes. 
>  To the extent that sustainability principles have merit, public 
> pressure and economic considerations will promote their implementation 
> much more effectively than regulation ever could.  Yes, I still 
> believe in old-fashioned capitalism.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Stan R. Caldwell, P.E., SECB
> Proud to be in Texas
> The Carbon Capital of North America      


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 




******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********