Building America 

Summer 2012 Technical 

Update Meeting Report

Denver, Colorado – July 24 - 26, 2012

October 2012
NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the 

United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency 

thereof, nor any of their employees, subcontractors, or affiliated partners makes any 

warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the 

accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or 

process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. 

Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade 

name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply 

its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or 

any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not 

necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency 

thereof.

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge

Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy

and its contractors, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062

phone: 865.576.8401

fax: 865.576.5728

email: mailto:reports@adonis.osti.gov

Available for sale to the public, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161

phone: 800.553.6847

fax: 703.605.6900

email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov

online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste
iii

Building America Summer 2012 Technical Update

Meeting Report

Prepared for: 

Building America

Building Technologies Program 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Prepared by:

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Boulevard 

Golden, CO 80401-3305 

October 2012 
iv

[This page left blank]
v 

Contents

About This Report...................................................................................................................................... vi

Program Background ................................................................................................................................ vi

Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................. vii

Meeting Participants ................................................................................................................................ viii

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................... ix

1 Day One: Standing Technical Committee Meetings ....................................................................... 10

Test Methods and Protocols (Dane Christensen, NREL) ........................................................10

Implementation (Deane Evans, NJIT, and Stacy Hunt, Confluence Communications) ..........16

Space Conditioning (Eric Martin, FSEC) ................................................................................18

Hot Water (Marc Hoeschele, Davis Energy Group) ................................................................19

Automated Home Energy Management (Lieko Earle and Bethany Sparn, NREL) ................20

Analysis Methods and Tools (Ben Polly, NREL) ....................................................................22

Enclosures (Joe Lstiburek and Katie Boucher, BSC) ..............................................................22

2 Days Two and Three: General Session ............................................................................................ 24

Issue 1 – How Do We First Do No Harm with High-R Enclosures? ......................................24

Issue 2 – What Emerging Innovations are the Key to Future Homes? ....................................28

Issue 3 – HVAC Proper Installation Energy Savings: Over-Promising or Under-Delivering?32

Issue 4 – Are High-Efficiency Hot Water Heating Systems Worth the Cost? ........................34

Issue 5 – How Much Insulation is Too Much? ........................................................................36

Issue 6 – Do Codes and Standards Get in the Way of High-Performance? .............................38

Issue 7 – What are the Best HVAC Solutions for Low-Load, High Performance Homes? ....40

Issue 8 – Better Technology Doesn’t Always Win—How Can We Ensure That Doesn’t 

Happen to High Performance Homes? ..............................................................................43

Issue 9 – What are the Best Ventilation Techniques?..............................................................44

3 Stakeholder Recommendations for Building America ................................................................... 49

4 Presenter Biographies ....................................................................................................................... 51
vi 

About This Report

The research results, needs, and opportunities identified in this report do not represent the 

opinion or positions of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) or the National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory (NREL) and NREL and DOE do not necessarily agree with all of the points made by 

the meeting presenters. This report is not intended to be a complete summary of results, needs, 

and opportunities for Building America, but to address a small segment of key topics that were 

chosen for the meeting agenda.

Program Background

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Building America (BA) program is engineering the 

American home for energy performance, durability, quality, affordability, and comfort. BA is an 

industry-driven research program working with national laboratories and building science 

research teams to accelerate the development and adoption of advanced building energy 

technologies and practices in new and existing homes. The program works closely with industry 

partners to develop innovative, real-world solutions that achieve significant energy and cost 

savings for homeowners and builders. 

Building America acts as a national residential test bed where different building system options 

are evaluated, designed, built, retrofitted, and vetted to ensure that requirements for energy 

efficiency, quality, sustainability, risk mitigation, and comfort are met. Research is conducted on 

individual measures and systems, test houses, and community-scale housing in order to validate 

the reliability, cost-effectiveness, and marketability of technologies when integrated into existing 

and new homes. 

Since its inception in the mid 1990’s, the research and deployment partnerships of the BA 

program (BA teams) have implemented projects that help dramatically improve the energy 

efficiency of American homes. These highly qualified, multidisciplinary teams work to deliver 

innovative energy efficiency strategies to the residential market and address barriers to bringing 

high-efficiency homes within reach for all Americans. 

Visit the BA website for more information about BA teams, projects, partners, and tools: 

www.buildingamerica.gov. 
vii 

Executive Summary

The Building America Summer 2012 Technical Update Meeting was held on July 24-26, 2012, 

in Denver, Colorado. More than 300 professionals representing organizations with vested interest 

in energy efficiency improvements in residential buildings registered for the event. This meeting 

served to create a forum to discuss issues related to energy efficiency in housing—specifically 

nine critical challenges without current definitive guidance—and to define recommendations 

from the BA program for housing industry stakeholders.

Presenters from BA teams and national laboratories focused on the following topics: 

Issue 1 – How Do We First Do No Harm with High-R Enclosures?

Issue 2 – What Emerging Innovations are the Key to Future Homes? 

Issue 3 – HVAC Proper Installation Energy Savings: Over-Promising or Under- Delivering?

Issue 4 – Are High-Efficiency Hot Water Heating Systems Worth the Cost?

Issue 5 – How Much Insulation is Too Much? 

Issue 6 – Do Codes and Standards Get in the Way of High Performance?

Issue 7 – What are the Best HVAC Solutions for Low-Load, High Performance Homes? 

Issue 8 – Better Technology Doesn’t Always Win—How Can We Ensure That Doesn’t Happen 

to High Performance Homes?

Issue 9 – What are the Best Ventilation Techniques?

Presentations and information on future meetings can be found on the BA website.
viii

Meeting Participants

2nd Floor Renovations Crown Jade Design and Engineering Inc. J Neymark& Associates

A Tennyson LLC Doug Keaty General Contractor JELD-WEN Commercial Solutions

A&E Building Systems Douglas County Johns Manville

A.O. Smith Corporation Dow Chemical Johnson Research LLC

Acme Marketing Drennen Custom Contracting Kalyx Studio

AGL Resources DuPont Building Innovations KANservation

AHRI Eagle Rock Supply Kenai Manufacturing

Albuquerque Stair Eco Construction Kirkwood Community College

American Chemistry Council EcoHome Magazine La Mirada Homes

AppleBlossom Energy, Inc. EcoSmart Homes Lawrence Berkeley National Lab

Appraisal Institute Ecotelligent Design Lennar Homes

ARBI-Davis Energy Group Efficiency.org The Levy Partnership

Architectural Energy Corporation Electric Power Research Institute Lightly Treading, Inc.

Argil Inc. Emerson Louisiana Pacific Corp.

Art of Engineering Empire Drafting and Design, LLC Marvin Windows and Doors

ASERusa Energy Center of Wisconsin Masco Home Services

Aspen Aerogels, Inc. Energy Design Update McGraw-Hill Construction

ATELIER Andre Energy Efficiency Business Coalition Metro Senergy Consulting

Atmos Energy Energy Logic Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance

avocet design & consulting llc Energy Matters, LLC MIT

B+Y Architects Energy Stewards International Moberly Public Schools

BARA Energy Vanguard Mountain Energy Partnership

Bauder Construction Environmental Counsel Associates NAHB Research Center

Bee Lang Homes Environmental Health Watch National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Belleview Neighborhood Environmental Protection Agency Navigant Consulting

BFIGCORP EverSealed Windows, Inc. Nevada ENERGY STAR Partners - GREEN 

Alli BGBG.ORG Faegre Baker Daniels New West Technologies, LLC

Bonneville Power Administration Finished Works Construction, Inc. Newport Partners, LLC

Boulder County FlexCom Systems, LLC Nexant

Boulder County EnergySmart Florida Solar Energy Center NJIT Center for Building Knowledge/BARA

Boulder County Housing Authority Fort Collins Utilities Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships 

Boulder ZED Design Built Fraunhofer CSE NorthernSTAR - University of Minnesota

Building Science Corporation Funding Partners Norton Energy R&D

Built Green, LLC Gas Technology Institute Nothwest Energy Works

Burlington County Institute of Technology GeoFireSafe International, LLC Oak Ridge National Laboratory

C.O.A.D. George Watt Architecture Oramic, LLC

Calomino Consulting Georgia-Pacific LLC The Overton Firm

CDH Energy Corp / ARIES Geos Smart Living Owens Corning

Center for Energy and Environment The Green Collar Institute at EETCKC OZ Architecture

Center for Sustainable Building Research Green Remodeling, LLC Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

CertainTeed Insulation GTI/PARR Panasonic Eco Solutions

CHEX Guardian Building Products Passive House Alliance, Denver

Chris Vigil Construction Hahn Eriksen Architects Pella / EFCO

Cincinnati State Technical & Community College Hanley Wood Business Media PGT Industries

City and County of Denver Hayes Insulation Phase Change Energy

City of Aspen, CO Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association Plumb Level Square

City of Aurora, CO High Tech Enterprises Populus

City Side Remodeling Hunter Douglas Window Fashions Preferred Weatherization Specialists

Clean Efficient Energy Company, LLC Hutton Architecture Studio ProActive Concepts

ClimateMaster IBACOS Progressive Energy Concepts

CMCCAA iCAST Protecto Wrap Company

The College of New Jersey ICF International PulteGroup

Colorado Code Consulting Independent Electrical Contractors Rocky Mountain R and R Heating & Cooling

Colorado Custom Stone, Inc. Innovation Affinity Group R. Pelton Builders, Inc.

Colorado Energy Office Institute for Building Technology & Safety RDK Engineers

Colorado Green Building Guild InterNACHI Re/Max Alliance

Confluence Communications Interplay Energy Reagan & Co. Inc.

Construction Instruction IPA Ltd Regal Beloit
ix

Retrogreen Inc

Riosuenoint'l

Rocky Mountain Institute

Ryland Homes

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD)

Smith Inspection Services L.L.C.

Soladigm

SolarCity

Solid State Heating Corporation, Inc.

Southface Energy Institute

Southwest Nomad Group

SRA International

Steven Winter Associates, Inc.

Sustainable Ideas

SWEEP

T J Hill & Associates

TexEnergy / US Eco Logic

Timbersil Wood California

Town of Parker, Colorado

Train2Build

U.S. Department of Energy

U.S. Energy Institute

University of Colorado at Boulder

University of Georgia

University of Minnesota

Verdant Management

Verified Green, LLC

Veterans Green Jobs

Vida Verde

Whirlpool Corporation

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the U.S. Department of Energy for hosting the meeting that is 

summarized in this report. We would also like to acknowledge the contributions of the Standing 

Technical Committee chairs for their work in the meeting. Finally, a special thanks to 

Confluence Communications for providing invaluable assistance to NREL in the production of 

the meeting and this report.
10 

1 Day One: Standing Technical Committee Meetings 

The Building America (BA) program strives to be the catalyst that transforms the 

residential building market, creating innovative home energy system solutions to achieve 

50% energy savings in existing and new homes for all U.S. climate regions. Building 

America works to identify barriers to energy improvements and participates in research 

partnerships working for the development of robust and innovative solutions. 

As part of this effort, BA Standing Technical Committees (STCs) capture and address 

specific research challenges, gaps in understanding, and new research opportunities 

identified by the BA program and its stakeholders. Committees include experts from the 

DOE, BA research teams, national laboratories, and industry organizations that offer 

specialized knowledge in the topic areas.

The BA STC meetings were held on July 24, 2012, and garnered more than 110 attendees from

various backgrounds. Each meeting focused on developing solutions to significant challenges 

facing the BA program and our nation’s energy efficiency programs. This section highlights key 

outcomes of each meeting.

More information on the goals of the STCs and summary reports for each research need can be 

found on the BA website at 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/building_america/strategic_plan.html

As a reminder, the STCs are open to all stakeholders and play a critical role in the BA research 

planning process. If you would like to participate, please contact the appropriate STC chair. 

Current information on each STC’s activities can be found on the BA STC Google Group at 

https://sites.google.com/site/buildingamericastc/. 

Test Methods and Protocols (Dane Christensen, NREL) 

The focus of the Test Methods and Protocols STC Meeting was to consider high-level milestones 

developed previously and circulated in a document entitled “Building America Critical Path 

Innovations Leading to 50% Savings.” These milestones characterize significant steps that must 

be achieved for the BA program to demonstrate its long-term energy conservation targets in the 

U.S. residential sector. Our purpose was to identify technical gaps and research needs that 

prevent building scientists and practitioners from achieving those milestones today. We 

discussed six milestones. The test methods-related gaps, barriers, and open research questions 

identified are listed below.

Milestone

In 2015, demonstrate minimally intrusive characterization of whole-house consumption, savings 

in new and existing homes for all major and significant minor loads, and operating conditions of 

any type.
11 

Interim Steps

In 2012, identify technical requirements and develop a roadmap. Cross-reference requirements 

to existing products and coordinate with industry on product development. Identify gaps for 

proxy measurements and methods. 

Gaps:

• Data collection analysis/management is very challenging. Consumption at the variety of 

end uses is sparse and requires different frequencies of data collection during use. 

• What are major and significant minor loads? (i.e., need criteria for defining each). 

• We lack sufficient understanding of state-of-the-art monitoring products/sensors that are

developing quickly. Sensors are expensive and tough to install/setup. It is hard to 

measure a variety of loads with a single sensor package. Need to ensure we have 

appropriate tools to monitor each important load/fuel type. 

• Devices/appliances do not self-report consumption/data. 

• Different methods and parameters apply in existing vs. new construction; we need tools 

for both. Occupied homes have occupants. 

• Less about analysis and more about what measurements can be done effectively: what are 

we measuring, how do we measure it, are there other hard-to-get measurements that we 

can get a good proxy for? 

• We need to investigate clever techniques to measure rather than the brute force approach. 

Set the right frame (short-term/long-term) for protocols. What can we do in long-term 

monitoring without intervening in occupant lifestyle? 

• We must minimize intrusiveness. Sometimes it is simplest to use occupants’ Internet 

service; how to do this in an appropriate way? What are the possible negative results, 

(blame for problem due to testing, etc)? 

• How do we disaggregate all testing information to identify the specific end uses?

• What is the ongoing communication process during the testing time for the occupants? 

• Field validation: how do you monitor a particular home? (example: would monitoring 

design change based on using a single zone vs. multiple zones for HVAC 

monitoring/analysis?)

• We could benefit from a menu of options/checklist; does everybody know all the 

options? What will the interview process look like to vet the home? 

In 2013, demonstrate wireless data logger systems. Develop and demonstrate NILM 

disaggregation prototypes. Demonstrate and characterize proxy measurements. 

Gaps:

• Limited budget, so monitoring tools must be affordable; currently inexpensive tools are 

unreliable.

• Proxy measurements are not well characterized in many cases.
12 

• We need to limit "useless information" gathering by designing better experiments.

• Develop clever techniques to replace "brute force" monitoring. 

• Long-term monitoring in existing homes is very intrusive. 

• Disaggregation sensors (NILM) are too new and unproven; we need to aggressively 

pursue these to understand their capabilities and limitations. 

• Prescriptive vs. performance specifications for field test protocols and sensor packages; 

which way is best to go for maintaining high technical quality at moderate cost? 

Developing new sensor packages from scratch for every test is challenging.

In 2014, develop tool for savings analysis based on vast expansion of end-use types. Continue 

refinement of NILM and wireless data system. Identify and prioritize significant minor loads that 

represent efficiency and control opportunity. 

Milestone

In 2015, develop and demonstrate method to characterize low-risk retrofit opportunities for 

below-grade and ground-contacting elements of new and existing buildings via analysis, 

including a full assessment of the large inherent uncertainties associated with below-grade 

conditions, validated by field testing. 

Interim Steps

In 2012, develop a research plan and specify uncertainties in driving boundary conditions and 

analysis gaps. Define test method and sensor gaps. 

Gaps:

• Need to identify what boundary conditions are needed (and where that boundary is). 

• Need to understand the dominant uncertainties in the analysis, to direct test method 

development. 

In 2013, develop initial models (in TRNSYS or similar) and validate via comparison testing with 

research-grade tools. Instrument a test house to collect field test data for model validation. 

Gaps:

• Limited budget, so monitoring tools must be affordable; currently, inexpensive tools are 

unreliable.

• What are the measurement needs for the analysis STC? For example, how do we measure 

ground moisture content, and evaluate it? 

• Developing a generalized strategy to evaluate heat transfer through foundation elements. 

Need strategies for each of the foundation types, differing soils conditions. 

• Do we know how to ask the right questions? What is the goal—risk mitigation?

• If the testing method is too expensive and time consuming to make the data worthwhile, 

what do we do? 
13 

In 2014, port models into EnergyPlus. Repeat validation with other tools/models to ensure 

EnergyPlus implementation is accurate. Validate against field data sets. Develop models for 

basement retrofit technologies.

Gaps:

• What quantity of datasets is needed to appropriately validate the models? 

Milestone

In 2015, enhance BEopt and the Building America House Simulation Protocols so that 

multifamily residential buildings (including single-family attached) can be modeled and 

optimized to determine cost-effective new construction designs and retrofit packages at the 50% 

energy savings level in new and existing homes. 

Interim Steps

In 2013, release a version of BEopt and published version of Building America House 

Simulation Protocols with capabilities and guidelines for modeling single-family-attached 

buildings. 

Gaps:

• Measurement of air leakage in multifamily buildings is very challenging and costly. What 

are the impacts of performing guarded measurements vs. collecting dP to calculate 

leakage between walls? We need to develop a streamlined protocol to measure air 

leakage model inputs and may need multiple protocols for evaluating IAQ, energy 

impacts, and thermal comfort.

• We don’t understand the physics of different fire separation assemblies (a.k.a. party 

walls). 

• Will model be for whole building or individual units? 

• Measuring occupancy for individual units; there are no tools for this. 

In 2014, release a version of BEopt and published version of Building America House 

Simulation Protocols with capabilities and guidelines for modeling larger multifamily buildings. 

Gaps:

• How do we characterize shared common areas and energy use (pools, hall lights, guard 

stations)?

• We need a methodology for characterizing multifamily shared mechanical systems; need 

to test usage patterns and losses, distribution, recirculation, controls, outdoor conditions. 

• Will our approach to a multifamily building depend on how the building is metered? 

• How do whole building retrofits affect individual units? 

How do individual retrofits affect neighbors? 
14 

Milestone

In 2015, develop publically-accessible empirical test suites for software tools and calibration 

methods that are based on: a) large sets of audit and utility billing data (including pre- and postretrofit); and b) research-quality data collected in laboratory and field tests in new and existing 

homes. 

Interim Steps

In 2012, identify potential sources of pre- and post-retrofit audit and billing data. Develop 

experimental plan for obtaining data to test interior temperature modeling for existing homes 

(set-points, temperature variation room-to-room). 

Gaps:

• How to capture utility use data information? Make it public? Develop a feeder-level 

monitoring tool kit?

• We need an avenue to protect data so that utilities will share. What's in it for the utility?

• Create a standardized structure to capture utilities’ data. What can we learn from it? What 

information do we need? 

• How to access tax assessor data and evaluate accuracy of this data. 

• Identify what data already exists and what data we need to collect. Perform a 

comprehensive background study on what data is available and determine if it is useful. 

• How can we connect to the real estate market and capture data from the MLS?

In 2013, have an initial empirical test suite of houses from the Building America Field Data 

Repository and complete field trials with working group of residential software developers. 

Collect laboratory and field test data for interior temperature modeling tests. 

In 2014, add pre-/post-retrofit test cases to the empirical test suite, if sufficient data are 

available, and complete the initial test suite for interior temperature modeling.

Milestone

In 2015, demonstrate market-ready space conditioning equipment for low load homes that 

delivers 10%-20% heating energy savings over current best practice in new homes.

Interim Steps

In 2012, document optimum sizing and resulting savings for cold climate heat pumps. ACCA 

Manual S committee is not including this approach to energy savings in their standard revision. 

Reduced latent capacity resulting from shorter run times is a concern regardless of climate, but 

select climates can benefit from the approach with 10%-15% savings. Results showing 

additional savings through proper commissioning and limiting defrost to 5kW should also be 

documented. 

Gaps:

• We don’t have a definition of “current best practice.”
15 

• We need to measure energy associated with current delivered comfort, i.e., measure 

current system performance in a service-oriented fashion. 

• What is take-back from achieving better comfort? 

• How to characterize improvements in distribution systems?

• How to measure “whole-house comfort?” 

• What is the breakpoint for "low load" homes, internal vs. external environment 

dominated? 

• Do we need better regional load/sizing calculation strategies?

• Evaporative coolers and other climate-focused systems must be considered. 

• Sizing for heating/cooling/ventilation systems simultaneously is challenging. 

• Do we need to study zone control strategies? 

• How do we measure and model interior uninsulated walls? 

• Develop field protocols to estimate performance maps for selected 

equipment/combinations of equipment (i.e., installed system performance maps when 

individual equipment performance maps are unavailable). 

In 2013, demonstrate 10%-15% savings through use of combination hydronic systems utilizing 

ENERGY STAR® water heaters. Building America research is achieving savings from such 

systems in the lab. Savings should also be documented when systems are deployed in test homes. 

Gaps:

• When a system is not commissioned, how does its energy use change? 

• Is savings due to equipment efficiency vs. system efficiency (including whole house)?

In 2014, develop algorithm for optimization of heat pump transition point temperature as a 

function of climate, auxiliary fuel, heating load, and system capacity, and simulate range of 

expected savings. Savings expected to be at least 10%. 

Milestone

In 2015, use data-driven analysis to provide heat pump water heater (HPWH) manufacturers with 

necessary data to optimize product design from a systems integration perspective. Achieve 50% 

energy savings relative to electric storage water heaters in preferred applications. Deliver best 

practices report with quality assurance guidelines to utility partners that provide confidence and 

ensure average performance targets will be met in both new and existing homes.

Interim Steps

In 2012, develop additional field studies for CY2013 to assess indoor location space 

conditioning impacts in all climates, humidity control benefits, and assess location impacts on 

annual performance for HPWHs.
16 

Gaps:

• How do we decide where heat pump water heaters live: conditioned vs. unconditioned? 

• We need a protocol for (standardized) monitoring of HPWHs. 

• How do we find out what we need to know relevant to the house? 

• Do we need to assess the quality of the installation? What are the impactful metrics?

• Are heat pumps the most efficient water heaters? Do we need to fill this gap?

• Commissioning standards: what are they and how should they be judged? 

• We may want to create a test protocol for distribution systems.

• How to monitor draw uses and end uses cost effectively? Develop test standards. 

In 2014, deliver field study data and conclusions to key stakeholders (expected to include 

manufacturers); include best practices regarding preferred applications of HPWHs 

(climate/load/unit location).

Implementation (Deane Evans, NJIT, and Stacy Hunt, Confluence 

Communications)

Overview/Key Meeting Points

During the Implementation (I-STC) meeting, Deane Evans and Stacy Hunt (co-chairs from the 

BARA team) facilitated a working discussion focused on creating specific, actionable 

recommendations for the BA program related to the Valuation of Energy Efficiency for use in 

research planning activities. The I-STC chairs presented a “straw man” based on previous I-STC 

and BA discussions and research related to the topic (captured in an I-STC update issued in July 

2012). 

The following key points bracket the recommendations proposed in this update: 

1. It is recognized that other federal agency initiatives—namely ENERGY STAR for New 

Homes and the Home Energy Score initiative as well as DOE HQ—have significant 

vested interest in exploring a more direct and forthright connection to the appraisal 

industry. The focus of BA work should be to ensure the adoption of Building America 

research results and to help collaborate with other initiatives to inform research planning 

for the BA program and to ensure effective valuation of BA measures and homes that 

meet BA performance targets.

2. Significant work has been done by BA teams related to the Valuation of Energy 

Efficiency. The goal is not to repeat this work, but to focus on critical issues and 

opportunities that prevent the widespread implementation of BA research results. The 

intent is to outline needs, identify current projects and initiatives that help to address 

these needs, and to identify specific areas where BA must develop solutions in order to 

ensure effective implementation of BA research results.

3. There are two significant issues related to the consistent Valuation of Energy Efficiency: 
17 

4. Lack of comparables and valuation data (whole house and specific measures) 

5. Lack of energy efficiency appraisal training and education (associated with tools to help 

appraisers value home performance)

6. The difference between the Valuation of Energy Efficiency when valuing new 

construction versus valuing upgrades to an existing home may be significant and should 

be discretely addressed in any future research and development activity. The relationship 

between “adjusted age” and energy upgrades should be considered carefully, as the age of 

a property plays into valuation significantly.

7. Focus of future research and development activities should be the Valuation of Energy 

Efficiency on a whole-house performance basis, not related to specific measures. 

However, details about specific energy measures when quantified in the context of 

overall home performance (i.e., reduction in utility bills, increases in building durability) 

are useful to appraisers in substantiating their valuation of a home. Thus, future work 

should address both whole-house energy performance using labeling programs as a basis 

for valuation and the valuation of specific energy measures, “innovations,” or upgrades. 

8. Appraisers and underwriters are two discrete stakeholder audiences that must be explored 

and addressed to ensure the effective implementation of BA research results related to the 

Valuation of Energy Efficiency. Current I-STC work explores only the appraisal portion 

of the process, but will extend to explore the underwriting issue. 

9. The Residential Green and Energy Efficient Addendum (Appraisal Institute) is currently 

the tool used by appraisers to help document the valuation of energy efficiency. This tool 

should be used as basis for the data format to implement BA research results in the 

appraisal community. 

I-STC Building America Recommendations—Valuation of Energy Efficiency

The following recommendations for the BA program were developed as a result of the July 24, 

2012, I-STC meeting:

1. Using the Residential Green and Energy Efficient Addendum as a basic framework:

• Develop and implement a strategy to produce appraisal/value data as part of all 

relevant research results. Specifically, tie a section of each measure guideline 

developed by the program to the appropriate section in the Residential Green and 

Energy Efficient Addendum and provide all relevant cost/performance data to 

help the appraiser substantiate the increased value associated with this measure.

• Integrate a draft Residential Green and Energy Efficient Addendum with current 

verification software, for use during the home performance contracting process, 

and in the DOE Challenge Home Initiative. 

2. Partner with the Appraisal Institute (and other appropriate) to:

• Augment existing education programs to inform appraisers on how to use the 

tools developed by BA that support the Residential Green and Energy Efficient 

Addendum. 
18 

• Promote the use of the Residential Green and Energy Efficient Addendum to 

appraisers and homeowners/homebuyers). 

3. Explore the opportunity to partner with the State of Colorado (Colorado has significant 

related initiatives underway) to evaluate other key issues and opportunities in addressing 

the Valuation of Energy Efficiency and to stay engaged in current thinking on the topic. 

I-STC Next Actions

The following actions were identified as a result of the July 24, 2012, I-STC meeting:

1. Understand the underwriting process, the role of the underwriter, and the connection 

between BA research results and the underwriting process. As part of the basis of 

discussion, residential “utility bill guarantee programs,” such as MASCO’s Environments 

for Living Program, should be explored to provide business-case information for 

underwriters about the comparative value of energy efficiency.

2. Evaluate current research on real market value of ENERGY STAR homes as compared 

with “standard” construction to determine if enough national data exists to make 

generalizations about increased value in home performance. 

3. Continue the process of discussing the adoption of Building America research results by 

utility-based programs, with the intent of developing research recommendations. 

Space Conditioning (Eric Martin, FSEC) 

The Space Conditioning Standing Technical Committee met to discuss the five space 

conditioning endpoint milestones with associated interim milestones identified at the April 

Critical Path Planning Meeting. These include: 

• Document BA Best Practice Guidelines for effective, reliable, and climate-specific whole 

house mechanical ventilation systems for new and existing homes. 

• Demonstrate market-ready space conditioning equipment that delivers 30% cooling 

energy savings relative to current SEER 16 systems while delivering BA best practice 

ventilation and providing adequate moisture control to ensure enclosure durability and 

occupant comfort in new and existing homes. 

• Document new construction community scale adoption of space conditioning distribution 

system solutions that ensure negligible conductive, radiant, and leakage losses in new and 

existing homes.

• Demonstrate market-ready space conditioning equipment for low load homes that 

delivers 10%-20% heating energy savings over current best practice in new homes.

• Demonstrate systems and strategies that achieve 10%-15% space conditioning energy 

savings by upgrading or supplementing existing heating/cooling equipment for existing 

homes where HVAC change-out is not cost effective. 

After a brief discussion of committee activity and meeting objectives, attendees divided into 

working groups. In addition to a general review of the milestones for accuracy and completeness, 

each group was tasked to identify specific, unanswered questions and research needs around each 

milestone to be addressed in the 2012 to 2013 timeframe. Some groups also discussed factors 
19 

that limit implementation of proven best practices. Groups also addressed two issues also of 

interest to the Hot Water STC: heat pump water heaters and combination space and water 

heating equipment. The Hot Water and Space Conditioning STCs briefly coordinated on these 

issues.

Hot Water (Marc Hoeschele, Davis Energy Group) 

At the Hot Water Standing Technical Committee meeting, chairs provided an update on BA and 

outside research activities related to the topic and presented draft Building America Critical Path 

Milestones. The group held a brainstorming session about the milestones. 

Key comments on the six currently identified milestones are summarized below:

1. Optimized Heat Pump Water Heater (HPWH) Design and Operation and Best Practice 

Guidelines 

• Real vs. rated EF: do we need better hot water load patterns to drive models? 

• An installation guide is needed. 

• What are the ways to mitigate noise impacts?

• Need to characterize the space conditioning and dehumidification impacts for 

units located indoors or in basements. 

• NREL is working on HPWH field test protocol that includes assessing space 

conditioning impacts (available for review shortly). 

• Smart grid coordination is needed in the future. 

2. High Efficiency Gas Solutions for Existing System Infrastructure

• Charlie Adams (AO Smith) says they have been working on hybrid systems with 

small tanks coupled to tankless (NEXT product on the market). Adams wonders 

what more is to be done. Discussion on better understanding peak load events 

(burner/storage downsizing?) and what benefit improved controls could have on 

annual efficiency. 

3. New Construction System Solutions (35%+ for Gas and to 50%+ for Electric) 

• Focus is on reducing distribution losses and adding efficient water heating

equipment. 

• Industry outreach and education; need for improved VoTech training; trades need 

to better understand PEX installation (layout, avoid pipe oversizing). 

• Modeling credit for improved distribution layouts (how to translate results from 

detailed simulation tools (TRNSYS, HWSIM) to hourly models, such as BEopt?). 

4. Best Practice Design and Implementation Guidelines for Combined Systems 

• Need combi system ratings (ASHRAE working on it, but not clear on the 

timeline). 
20 

• Best practices guidelines needed. According to Schoenbauer, a great deal of work 

is needed to achieve the 15% savings. Will the industry be able to reliably deliver 

these systems? Need to engage with industry to get optimally performing 

products. 

• Modeling: Lots of variables: 

o Need radiant systems and hydronic fan coils in BEopt. 

o For radiant systems, what are the standard layouts? 

o For hydronic fan coils, is there a standard layout? Pipe length/sq ft, etc.? 

• What are the cost tradeoffs for different delivery options? What are multifamily

system costs?

5. Optimized Multifamily Recirculation Systems Solutions

• Continuous recirculation is standard in high rise multifamily buildings. CARB 

(Robb Aldrich) is working on multifamily recirculation on two gut rehabs (12 and 

22 unit projects). 

6. System Integration Evaluations for Solar Water Heat

• Cost, maintenance issues, and battle over roof space are the key barriers. 

• Builders may be gun-shy towards solar. 

• Multifamily buildings offers better cost effectiveness since there is a bigger load 

to serve. 

• Improved understanding of seasonal hot water load variations. Appears that 

SRCC overestimates summer loads, resulting in higher than “real” solar fractions. 

• Niche specialty contractors contribute to high costs. 

Automated Home Energy Management (Lieko Earle and Bethany Sparn, NREL) 

The majority of individuals who attended the Automated Home Energy Management (AHEM) 

STC meeting on July 24 in Denver are not regular participants in the committee. As such, it was 

a challenge to get the conversation going in the right direction, but, in the end, the brainstorm 

sessions benefitted from the diversity of perspectives. The following items were agreed upon as 

key next steps and questions to be researched: 

Toward Milestone 1: Validate effective whole house control strategies that maximize comfort 

and energy savings in new and existing homes. 

• Identify savings potential when optimizing cooling system—look at first stage vs. second

stage, extending cycle for steady state operation.

• Determine savings potential of fault detection diagnostics (FDD) tools. 

• Should/can ventilation be demand-controlled? 

• Complete inventory of what sensors are available vs. what sensors are needed.
21 

• How can whole-house monitoring identify AHEM energy savings opportunities? 

• Evaluate the interoperability between existing devices.

Toward Milestone 2: Identify and break down barriers to market adoption of technologically 

sound AHEM solutions for new and existing homes. 

• Is there an AHEM industry group? 

• Define first who would be primary audience for AHEM taxonomy. 

• Recognize that these are not just products—they can include analysis and algorithms. 

• Taxonomy could be focused on identifying core functionalities rather than particular 

devices. 

• Strategize how to incent manufacturers to collaborate (since they have similar work but 

have some proprietary piece)?

• Need to work on standardization of communication protocol. 

• It's time for another AHEM expert meeting (like the one NREL hosted in fall of 2009) to 

compare notes on the current state of technology. 

Toward Milestone 3: Determine the opportunities for using controls to curb inadvertent energy 

use in homes and quantify the energy that can be saved in new and existing homes. 

• What are the loads? Range of devices? When should they be completely turned off? 

These questions can be answered through monitoring. 

• What are the technologies available for control? (e.g., advanced power strips) 

• Define power source types: always on, easily switched, automatically switched (timer, 

motion), “smart,” other?

• Talk to Continental Automated Buildings Association (CABA). 

Toward Milestone 4: Analyze control strategies for energy impact during demand response 

events and evaluate related utility cost and energy savings in new and existing homes.

• Order priority of appliances (ranked by highest demand?). 

• Peak performance prioritization—which appliances run coincident to peak? 

• Leverage security industry, which can drive innovation. 

• Investigate smart controls by climate region.

• Match construction type and design parameters for effectiveness of precooling. 

• Identify and evaluate potential unintended consequences.
22 

Analysis Methods and Tools (Ben Polly, NREL) 

The Analysis Methods and Tools (AMAT) STC met to identify gaps related to the critical path 

milestones that were defined by the committee in early 2012. 

Ben Polly, the chair of the AMAT STC, began the meeting with an overview of the critical path 

milestones, and reviewed the working definition for a “gap” related to a critical path milestone. 

He emphasized that gaps are research questions and barriers that, if not addressed, could prevent 

us from achieving the milestone. Gaps are not just questions that will be answered along the way 

by researchers who complete projects that address the milestone. Rather, they are critical 

questions that must be answered to properly define the technical scope of any work that will be 

proposed and performed to meet the milestone. They may also represent barriers that must be 

tracked at the STC-level to ensure coordination across the BA program and with outside groups 

so that the barriers can be overcome.

After the overview, the group broke out into three working groups. Each working group was 

responsible for defining gaps corresponding to a particular critical path milestone. More 

specifically, gaps were defined for the 2012 and 2013 interim milestones. The groups discussed 

the topics for about thirty minutes, recording ideas on flip charts provided in the meeting. One 

representative from each group then reported the major outcomes (defined gaps) for discussion 

as an entire group. After a short break, this process was completed for three additional topics, 

one of which was a topic suggested at the meeting for consideration as an additional critical path 

milestone. 

Overall the meeting was a successful first step in identifying gaps for the critical path milestones. 

The chair will summarize the key gaps defined in the meeting and send those to the committee 

for further contributions and review. Detailed notes for the meeting will be made available on the 

AMAT STC website.

Enclosures (Joe Lstiburek and Katie Boucher, BSC) 

The goal of the Enclosures STC meeting was to identify the questions that need to be answered 

in order to achieve the following six critical milestones that will need to be achieved in order to 

reach 50% energy savings:

1. By end of 2015, adopt code language defining the requirements for attaching cladding 

over typical thicknesses of insulating sheathing (i.e., 1", 1.5", 2", and 4") for both 16" and 

24" o.c. framing. 

2. By end of 2015, adopt code language defining the requirements for insulating the 

underside of wood floors using insulating sheathing. 

3. By end of 2015, develop a method of retrofitting monolithic slab-on-grade foundations. 

4. By end of 2015, approve fire-tested wall assemblies, including insulating sheathing over 

wood framing for use in new and existing low-rise and mid-rise multifamily buildings.

5. Published durable high-R enclosure system selection guidelines by climate for new 

construction and majority of wall constructions and enclosure retrofits in existing homes.
23 

6. By end of 2015, address the Weatherization Program practice of promoting and using 

methods that violate existing codes such as dense packing unvented cathedral ceilings.

It is important to note that the goal of the meeting was not to actually solve the problems or 

answer the questions, but to identify the questions that need to be answered. In order to achieve 

this goal, Joseph Lstiburek presented each of the milestones and facilitated a group discussion. 

Following each milestone discussion, attendees were asked to answer the following two 

questions: 

1. What was the most important question discussed? 

2. What questions still remain?

Attendees responded to these questions using comment forms distributed at the beginning of the

meeting. The comment forms were collected at the end of the meeting and will be used as an aid 

when updating the milestone language. 

Prior to the in-person meeting, the committee held two conference calls to discuss Milestones 1 

and 2. Since the meeting, one additional call was held to discuss Milestone 3. Milestones 4, 5 

and 6 will be discussed over the next three months. Meeting presentations and meeting notes 

have all been posted to the committee website.
24 

2 Days Two and Three: General Session

Building America (BA) teams represent world-class building science expertise for high 

performance homes. Program customers, including builders, contractors, HERS raters, designers, 

and consultants face significant challenges in determining consistent recommendations for key 

building-related issues. The Summer 2012 Building America Technical Update Meeting

presented a diverse array of expert perspectives on nine key issues followed by a facilitated 

discussion to narrow down the best BA guidance that can be provided at this time. The intent of 

the panel format was to evaluate the status of solutions to key questions currently limiting 

implementation of high performance homes with the intent of arriving at a set of expert BA 

recommendations for these key issues. 

The following section of the report provides details on each session, including: 

• Background for the specific issue, to provide context 

• Proposed solutions, developed by session presenters prior to the meeting 

• Expert recommendations, gathered live from each meeting session. 

This report is not intended to be an exhaustive capturing of the details of each session, but a 

summary of key points and recommendations. 

Full presentations are available online at www.buildingamerica.gov. 

Issue 1 – How Do We First Do No Harm with High-R Enclosures?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question: 

What materials and approaches provide the “perfect,” cost-effective, production-level, high-R 

enclosures for all major U.S. climate regions that ensure no moisture damage? 

Presentations were developed based on these desirable characteristics for high performance 

enclosure solutions: 

• Easily adaptable elements for different climates, allowing for standardized construction 

approaches across all climates 

• Minimizes possibility of condensation within walls 

• Can be easily adapted to allow use of a broad range of cladding systems 

• Minimizes increase of labor and material cost compared to current reference production 

wall systems defined by IECC 2012 

• Reliably integrates window installation and flashing, drainage plane, air barrier, and shear 

strength requirements 

• Controls groundwater and soil gas entry into the conditioned space 
25 

• Reliably predicts durability and performance of enclosures by advanced analytical and 

experimental hygrothermal test protocols 

• Controls groundwater and soil gas entry into the conditioned space 

• Dries within an acceptable period of time after water intrusion events via a combination 

of vapor diffusion and/or convection 

• Durability and performance of enclosure can be reliably predicted by advanced analytical 

and experimental hygrothermal test protocols. 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Moisture Performance through Field Testing For High Performing Homes; Vladimir Kochkin

The hygrothermal adaptation of higher insulated and air sealed framed wall systems has been and 

continues to be evaluated both in software simulation and in field testing. The field research 

effort is focused on identifying and compiling the moisture performance details specifically for 

high performance frame wall systems using field tests in occupied homes in various climate 

zones and in test buildings in climate zone 4. The NAHB Research Center Industry Partnership 

described this study and presented preliminary data from a few houses during this past winter 

(2011/2012). Ultimately, the project will detail actual moisture performance of wall systems in a 

variety of climate zones that meet or exceed the minimum insulation levels and air tightness 

requirements of the 2012 IECC. 

How Do We First Do No Harm With High-R Enclosures?; Joseph Lstiburek 

The perfect wall must have a water control layer, air control layer, vapor control layer, and 

thermal control layer outboard of the structure coupled with a ventilated and drained cladding 

system. These requirements are necessary for all U.S. climate regions. The production level 

adaptation of this wall is an advanced wood frame 2x6 assembly with structural sheathing, a 

water control layer, air control layer, and thermal control layer outboard of the structural 

sheathing and a ventilated and drained cladding. Interior vapor retarders are Class II or greater; 

interior vapor retarders of Class I should not be used in any U.S. climate region. Cost shifting 

and cost trade-offs can make this assembly either the same cost as conventional framing or 

within 5% of conventional framing, depending on climate zone and wind zone/seismic zone 

requirements. 

Exterior Wall Retrofit Strategies with Exterior Insulating Sheathing; Richard Baker 

In new and existing homes across all U.S. climate regions, it is generally recognized that adding 

exterior foam sheathing and other strategies (e.g., structurally insulated panels (SIPS), insulating 

concrete forms (ICFs), spray foam) reduces condensation potential inside the wall cavity and 

improves energy efficiency. Exterior foam and these other strategies can be difficult to detail and 

install, as well as expensive to implement, especially in retrofit situations where the vast majority 

of housing is existing 2x4 cavity wall construction. When modeling a retrofit wall system 

(including windows and doors), similar energy savings can be achieved by dense packing the 

walls and installing high-R windows. The New York State Energy Research and Development 

Authority (NYSERDA) is undertaking an exterior wall retrofit research project to more closely 

evaluate the costs associated with a variety of exterior insulation strategies. IBACOS is leading 
26 

one of these efforts to compare the energy consumption of exterior insulated building enclosures 

(rigid foam sheathing and spray foam with stand-off furring) without window replacement to 

dense-packed 2x4 wall cavities with new high-R windows. Ultimately, what the industry appears 

to need is not a “one size fits all” solution (i.e., the “perfect” solution) but a portfolio of 

regionally appropriate solutions (the “good” solutions) that can meet basic durability, comfort, 

and energy efficiency criteria based on the level of work that the homeowner is planning. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

The BA program is conducting ongoing research required to develop more robust enclosure 

guidelines, specifications, and construction details to ensure that high-R walls are both durable 

and cost effective. The following recommendations pose some of the most current thinking on 

how to effectively build high-R enclosures: 

All Enclosures: 

Deal with moisture and water issues first, then air seal and insulate.

Walls:

• The best wall system follows this basic premise: always align and connect the four 

primary layers. This should happen everywhere in the building enclosure from the way a 

wall is designed, a roof, slab, everything. All control elements are connected even with 

and around penetrations. 

o Water to water. 

o Air to air. 

o Vapor to vapor. 

o Heat to heat. 

• A highly recommended wall system adds rigid insulation over an insulated advanced 

frame assembly (applicable for up to 4” of insulating sheathing). The layers of this 

system include: 

o Advanced framing—less expensive, works better. 

o OSB in corners, insulating sheathing everywhere else. Wherever you have 

insulating sheathing, you must have a gap to back ventilate and drain your 

cladding systems. 

o Rigid insulation over OSB. As rigid insulation gets greater than 1/2” thick, this 

becomes a potential structural concern with code approval. Research is 

developing data to resolve this issue. 

o Wrap and tape seams. 

o Flashings on window openings. Need good windows, installed properly (SHGC 

.2-.25). Most of the time, the problem isn’t the window, it’s connection of 

window to wall. Pan flash sill and conventional flashing at jambs and head. 

o Furring strips over wrapped insulating sheathing to ensure a drainage gap (1/2” 

min. 3/4” better).
27 

o This is the only technology that is going to work because we need to allow drying. 

o Cladding on OSB over furring strips. 

• SIPs/ICFs have moisture control issues, but there are solutions. For example, ventilated 

cladding is a solution to this moisture problem. SIP roof panels have the same problem 

and solution. 

• Liquid applied membranes are a great technology, especially when they become costeffective and readily available. Won’t work in areas that remain wet for longer periods of 

time like the bottom areas of the drainage plane. 

• With ultra-efficient homes employing double-wall framing, the outside sheathing layer is 

so cold that it needs to be more permeable to ensure drying. Thus, OSB is not 

recommended in this application. Instead, more permeable sheathing such as plywood 

and exterior grade drywall should be used. Note that double wall construction is more 

risky in cold climates because of the inability to locate the dew point outside of the wall.

• Retrofitting existing walls with insulation needs to be carefully considered and rejected if 

it is not possible to provide a complete water management system.

• Insulating sheathing used as the backer for spray foam is a good strategy in retrofit 

scenarios.

Attics:

• While there is increasing interest in unvented attics with insulation installed at the roof 

sheathing, vented attics work best and minimize moisture control issues. It is common to 

put mechanical systems in the attic. Don’t.

• That said, unvented attics can work and help locate HVAC ducts inside conditioned 

space, but they should include a furred vent space above the insulation in cold climates.

• SIP roofs have moisture control issues, but there are solutions. Use ventilated space over 

panel to address this moisture problem. 

Foundations: 

• Exterior foundation insulation provides poor moisture management and is expensive. 

• Interior foundation insulation needs to ensure effective drying to the interior. 

• Best strategy for slab on grade retrofit is insulated stem wall.

• Post-tension monolithic slab, insulating on the edge is futile, insulate on top. 

Windows: 

• There are two types of windows—windows that leak and windows that will leak. Build 

with this understanding. 

• In retrofit scenarios, pull windows and reinstall to ensure that flashing connects with the 

wall drainage plane and water that gets into the window assembly drains to the outside. In 

addition, this allows for sealing the rough opening gap. 
28 

Codes and Standards: 

• Building codes provide minimum requirements, not solutions for every situation. 

• Need better guidelines; builders need specific solutions. 

• Need to be careful—too much insulation can create moisture in wall structure, need to 

minimize condensation in walls. 

• Code does not require vapor barrier on interior. 

• Relative humidity maintained per ASHRAE 160. 

• Related to radon, there is fear from outside the industry that a depressurized house and 

extreme air sealing will invite more radon into the home. Dealers and industry 

representatives have been worried that positive pressure will force vapor into the walls 

and create condensation and potentially draw radon into the living space. If you air seal 

and insulate at the roof, you should actually decrease radon. The best thing to do is 

ventilate under the slab because it is hard to combat the negative pressure built up of any 

house (regardless of climate, air sealing, etc.).

• Occasionally, walls will get wet and need to dry out. Do not over seal!

Issue 2 – What Emerging Innovations are the Key to Future Homes?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question: 

What are the most important emerging innovations that will solve critical problems and capture 

new performance opportunities for future homes? 

Presentations were based on these desirable characteristics for emerging solutions: 

• Provides whole house savings at neutral cost compared to current solutions 

• Increases home durability and comfort 

• Reduces warranty and call back costs 

• Reduces the cost or increases the performance of other systems. 

Examples include high-R windows, heat pump clothes dryers, heat pump water heaters, “next 

gen” home automation systems, “next gen” home entertainment and home office products, 

ENERGY STAR-rated power supplies, air handlers with integrated ventilation and hydronic 

coils, etc. 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 
29 

Ductless Hydronic Distribution Systems; David Springer 

Field research and TRNSYS analysis suggest that distribution efficiencies for ductless hydronic 

systems of over 90% are easily achievable. The ARBI research team completed a technical 

report on the evaluation of ductless hydronic distribution systems. Findings from this technical 

report indicate that annual heating and cooling energy use (site and source) can be reduced by up 

to 27% when substituting pumps, pipes, and small fan coils for blower, refrigerant coil, and ducts 

and replacing a conventional 13 SEER heat pump and coil with a similarly rated air-to-water 

heat pump. The team is also monitoring and evaluating two homes in hot-dry climates using airto-water heat pumps to deliver heating and cooling using radiant floor distribution. Performance 

data from one home during the summer of 2011 shows very favorable cooling system 

performance without the need for dehumidification or risk of floor condensation. These systems 

are applicable in all climate regions (fan coils are needed in humid climates) and can provide 

sensible and latent cooling and/or heating using a single hot and chilled water source such as a 

heat pump, or a high efficiency water heater (combined system) and separate chiller. Heat pump 

chiller-heaters can be supplied factory charged with refrigerant, thus avoiding problems of 

incorrect refrigerant charge in the field. 

Home Energy Management Systems and Reduced Consumption; Duncan Prahl 

The IBACOS research team has conducted energy analyses on more than 30 different house 

plans of existing homes across multiple U.S. climate zones for Lend Lease, a military housing 

provider. It is not surprising that, based on utility bills, the actual energy consumption in houses 

varied dramatically from modeled predictions. One project that Lend Lease has implemented on 

a limited scale that shows promise for persistent energy savings is the E3 Greentech Enterprises 

wireless home energy management system using cloud computing. Sensors provide data to the 

cloud where it is processed by E3’s analytic software which then sends signals back to the house 

and uses the sensors to control various systems to reduce energy consumption. The E3 system 

learns how the occupants live in the house and use the systems and then develops ways to 

eliminate waste while maintaining the occupants’ desired functionality. The E3 system also can 

identify failures and poorly performing equipment and can be used for demand control. IBACOS 

believes this type of solution is needed for large-scale deployment to automate savings by 

managing the operation of devices and systems instead of relying on occupants to be active 

participants. 

Excavationless Foundation Insulation for Existing Homes; Garrett Mosiman 

To be successful, a foundation insulation retrofit should reduce building energy use in a costeffective manner while reducing risks associated with factors like water intrusion and moisture 

accumulation in vulnerable materials. The ideal solution would involve a quick and surgical 

excavation with minimal damage to landscape features and house components. Then the 

resulting trench would be filled with a material that would reduce heat loss through the basement 

walls while reducing moisture loading in the basement from the soil. An excavation technology 

capable of digging a very precise, narrow trench adjacent to an existing foundation has been 

identified, as well as three pourable materials suitable for use as below-grade insulation. These 

include cellular concrete, perlite concrete, and pourable polyurethane foam. All are, or can be, 

significantly resistant to moisture penetration. 
30 

Role of Highly-Insulating Windows in Achieving 50% Energy Savings in Residential 

Retrofits; Sarah Widder and Terry Mapes 

An evaluation of highly insulating (R-5) windows was conducted in side-by-side lab homes. The 

whole house energy consumption and temperature distributions in the experimental home were

compared to those in the baseline home, which has aluminum frame, double pane clear glass 

windows typical of most existing homes. These data will be used to quantify the energy savings 

and thermal comfort improvement from the R-5 windows in the lab homes during the heating 

and cooling season. Data collected on the homes will also be compared to predicted savings from 

the EnergyPlus model. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

BA is constantly evaluating new technologies and systems—innovations—to determine the 

conditions under which new systems cost less and perform better than current solutions or solve 

existing challenges. In some cases, innovations provide interesting alternatives to current 

solutions. In other cases, more work may be required before new systems are ready for “prime 

time.” In both cases, it is the role of the BA program to explore and support the development of 

promising new technologies to advance the state of housing performance. 

The following summaries represent the four emerging innovations presented during the meeting: 

Ductless Hydronic Distribution 

Ductless hydronic distribution provides: 

• Increased distribution efficiency over air ducts, approaching 100% efficiency because it 

is easier to route inside conditioned space. 

• More energy efficiency because of distribution efficiency, the utilization of pumps versus 

fans, and better sizing. 

• Much easier to zone, increased comfort, equipment takes less space, no combustion 

safety issues, not much more complicated than a forced air system, but requires 

contractor education. 

• Cons are that it is difficult to do cooling, there is limited availability of compact air 

handler products, requires engineering, and has a high cost of heat pump equipment. 

High Performance Windows 

• Low U-value, high solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC), low cost windows don’t really 

exist yet, though there are companies working on this now that incentives for the hot 

climate windows have gone away. 

• The role of highly-insulating windows in achieving 50% energy savings in residential 

retrofits is significant and follows two types—primary replacement and storm window 

additions. 

• Retrofits are increasing, but window upgrades are not always pursued because of cost and 

lack of awareness of current products. 

• BA needs to verify performance of highly insulating primary windows and low-e storm 

windows. 
31 

• Right now, it is difficult to get the cost down for high performance windows because 

there is a lack of regional distribution. 

• BA needs to give more guidance on how to deal with historic window replacement.

Home Energy Management Systems

• Home energy management (HEM) systems can significantly reduce energy consumption, 

but the technology is still being optimized.

• People don’t want to think, they want technologies that make their lives easier. 

• Expert prediction is that everything with a plug is going to have a chip in it and the smart 

meter will be the gateway. 

• Ideally, everything works together with minimal interaction from occupant. 

• The most compelling technology today is the Nest, but it’s simply a thermostat and not a 

HEM system. 

• BA should help quantify how much energy is actually saved with smart power strips.

Nearly Excavationless Foundation Exterior Insulation Systems

• Inside insulation option common, easily done, but has issues:

o Water management

o Capillary break at sill. 

• An outside insulation option has various hygrothermal benefits as the warmer wall can 

dry to interior and lack of capillary break is less important since the wall is drier.

• It is practical (2-3 day operation on a simple house) to dig up the yard to the footing and 

install an exterior insulation system. However, preliminary costs shown do not take into 

account replacement of landscape features.

Other Innovations to Watch

• Exterior shading options. 

• Heat pump clothes dryer. 

• Smart power strips. 

• Wireless/GPS enabled zone controlled air handlers. 

• More HVAC solutions like window air conditioners that minimize refrigerant needs and 

are factory-sealed without need for maintenance, easy-to-install and cost-effective. 
32 

Issue 3 – HVAC Proper Installation Energy Savings: Over-Promising or UnderDelivering?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question:

What energy savings are realistically achievable by following quality installation standards for 

installation, operation, and maintenance of residential HVAC? 

Presentations were based on these desirable characteristics for installation and maintenance 

solutions: 

• Simple checklists inspection and diagnostics installers can apply to verify correct 

installation and maintenance 

• Simple consumer operation and maintenance guides 

• Equipment sensing and self-diagnostics 

• Contractor certification 

• Clear documentation of the value and savings that result from proper installation and 

maintenance 

• Increase in component and labor cost minimized compared to equivalent systems. 

Proposed Solutions 

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Guidelines on Airflow and Charge Verification; David Springer 

Home performance contractors frequently overlook HVAC maintenance or resort to replacement 

of equipment that may not solve the original problem, creating a missed opportunity. Several 

studies have shown that a significant percentage of air conditioning systems suffer from 

inadequate airflow resulting from undersized filters and/or ducts or incorrectly designed zoning 

systems and refrigerant problems including incorrect charge, non-condensables in the refrigerant, 

and other problems. The objective of an air conditioner installation and maintenance protocol 

should be to ensure that systems operate close to the efficiency at which they are rated by manufacturers. Given measurement uncertainty, a tolerance of 5% should be an achievable goal that 

can be accomplished by properly applying equipment sizing principals, closely following 

manufacturer installation instructions, and properly implementing diagnostic testing and 

remediation procedures. However, these measures should be cost effective. To respond to this 

need, the ARBI team completed a measure guideline that recommends an efficient two-step 

approach for the diagnosis and repair of existing air conditioning systems. 

Improving Installed Furnace Performance — A 48-House Case Study; Tim Hanes 

Nameplate furnace output is usually based on ideal conditions, not the ones found in the field. 

Proper fan speed adjustments, tuning, and duct sizing matter and can improve performance by as 

much as 30%. Adding a flow measuring device to the furnace tuning toolkit allows for 
33 

measurement of delivered energy to compare with the nameplate values. This project proposed 

the addition of that measurement, an analysis of performance vs. name plate, checklist targets for 

settable parameters, and a method to evaluate performance improvement. A furnace tune-up is a 

cost-effective measure in some homes at a price that is 1/10th the cost of replacement. Those 

upgrade dollars can then be focused on insulation, air sealing, and other measures. These are 

especially cost effective where recent mid-efficiency furnaces are in place but are not properly 

installed and costing up to 10% of the potential delivered energy from the system. The 

presentation covered the application of this technique to the 48 houses in the field study, providing pre-retrofit information and post-retrofit improvement assessments. 

A PDI for Your HVAC System; Iain Walker 

The installation of an HVAC system is more important than selection of higher performance 

equipment. What is needed is the equivalent of an automobile Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) for 

residential HVAC systems. This includes diagnostic tests for air flow, refrigerant charge, filter 

performance, fan power consumption, combustion, and so on. Along with focusing on energy 

performance, there is also more important value, from the occupant’s perspective, in terms of 

comfort, indoor air quality, reliability, and durability. The reliability and durability aspects are 

also important for equipment manufacturers to ensure that their equipment is installed properly. 

The proposed solution is to develop a PDI checklist of inspections and diagnostics. This 

checklist is already mostly covered in contractor certification, such as BPI or NATE, or in homeenergy rating requirements, such as RESNET. However, good standards and diagnostics for 

heating and cooling system air flows and ventilation air flows are missing components. In 

addition, many home performance contractors and certified technicians lack the explicit training 

required for some HVAC procedures, such as dealing with refrigerants or measuring electric 

power consumption, and these will need to be dealt with in some constructive way. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

Technology isn’t always the problem; installation and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) 

methods can also contribute to reduced system performance. BA works extensively to develop 

installation and QA/QC guidance for the industry to reduce the instances of “designed vs. 

installed” performance issues. The following guidance was provided on key areas to ensure 

proper installation of HVAC equipment to improve expected performance: 

• If we fixed (sealed/insulated/tested) all the ducts in the United States, we might save 

about $25 billion a year. Contractors need to change from low-bid service techs to high 

profit professionals. This will reward good contractors and offer a better public image. 

This would also provide equipment manufacturers with less warranty claims and a better 

public image.

• Measure the temperature split (between return and supply plenums) for quick and 

effective AC inspection. This split is easy to measure and is used to determine system 

health.

• Must properly train HVAC technicians, installers, and sales people. Public awareness of 

proper installation correlating value is a must, otherwise, with just training the technician, 

change won’t happen. Promote participation in ENERGY STAR, ACCA QI, SAVE, and 

other programs focusing on HVAC installation. 
34 

• Develop a pre-delivery inspection (PDI) checklist and label (include target and system 

test results) for HVAC, make it law, regulate, and require it. Label and certify for tight 

equipment. By force of law, the HVAC industry must have a PDI with on-board 

diagnostics installed on all HVAC equipment to ensure it operates as expected. 

• Need to create public awareness around these issues and national verification by qualified 

organizations—greatest obstacles are increased cost and getting homeowners to 

understand the value associated with the cost. 

Issue 4 – Are High-Efficiency Hot Water Heating Systems Worth the Cost?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question: 

What are realistic energy savings associated with the latest advanced and forthcoming water 

heating technologies and are they cost effective? 

Presentations were based on these desirable characteristics for a high-efficiency water heating 

system: 

• Long lifetime 

• Reliable operation 

• Dependable energy savings 

• Ensured combustion safety 

• Cost effectiveness. 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Water Heater Replacement Field Study Leading to Tankless Water Heater Option; Ben 

Schoenbauer 

Space conditioning loads are typically the largest energy use in residential homes. Both new 

construction and existing homes are becoming tighter and better insulated to reduce this usage. 

Thus, the water heating energy usage becomes a bigger part of the energy use in a home, and 

water heating is typically very inefficient. Additionally, tightening homes increases the 

combustion safety risks associated with natural draft water heaters. Recent studies indicate that 

tankless water heaters can solve both of these issues. Non-condensing tankless water heaters can 

save 25%-50% of a home’s hot water energy bills. A condensing model can save up to 60%. 

Tankless water heaters are power vented and most models have sealed combustion, reducing the 

dangers of back drafting in a tight, well insulated home.

In retrofit applications there are a wide range of install costs for tankless water heaters. In the 

best cases, tankless units can be installed for $2500, up to around $5000 in homes with difficult 
35 

installations. In new construction (or in a retrofit application where a power vented water heater

is required) the incremental costs can be significantly reduced. In these homes, a non-condensing 

tankless water heater can be installed for about the same cost as a power vented tank type water 

heater (models with an EF of 0.60-0.65 are typically installed). A condensing tankless water 

heater can be installed for $300 to $500 incremental cost. 

The largest implementation issue for tankless water heaters occurs in retrofit installations. 

Tankless water heaters operate in such a different manner than the storage water heaters they are 

typically replacing, installs can be difficult. Changing gas lines, locating the intake air and 

exhaust pipes, installing a condensate drain pump, altering the plumbing pipes to connect to the 

new water heater, and moving the location of the water heater can all add cost and time to an 

installation.

Performance of Gas-fired Water Heaters in a 10-home Field Study; Dan Cautley

The Energy Center of Wisconsin recently performed a study of gas-fired water heater 

performance in 10 homes. In each home, the performance of an existing atmospherically vented 

water heater was monitored for a period of months, after which each water heater was replaced 

with a power vent or tankless unit with continued monitoring. Monitoring included water and 

energy use, the volumetric flow of room air through the venting system, and indicators of vent 

spillage. Savings for power vent and tankless water heaters were estimated at about $20 to $70 

per year at 50 gallon per day hot water loads. The loss of conditioned air through an atmospheric 

venting system adds an estimated typical space heating load of 9 therms per year in a Wisconsin 

climate zone. Combustion products spillage is quite common, but usually corrects itself within a 

few minutes. In addition to cost, other considerations in the selection of a water heater 

technology include total hot water load, the need for a chimney for other appliances and/or a 

chimney liner, household experience with running out of hot water, the performance of tankless 

systems in providing continuous hot water at a regulated temperature (including the specific 

problem that dishwasher operation may not trigger tankless water heater burner operation), and 

combustion safety in some cases.

Cost-Effective Water Heating Solutions; Marc Hoeschele

Considerable data has been collected in recent years on the performance of advanced gas water 

heaters and the newly emerging heat pump water heaters. The data can be used to characterize 

performance under various applications and usage scenarios, recognizing that water heater 

recovery load magnitude and use patterns have a significant impact on seasonal operating 

efficiency. Future residential water heating loads will likely decrease as appliances, fixtures, and 

distribution systems become more efficient. The ARBI team has recently completed guidelines 

that identify cost-effective water heater solutions based on load, climate, utility rates, rebates, 

and estimated incremental cost. With this information, the guidelines inform the user on the cost 

effectiveness of various advanced water heater solutions. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

Technical solutions without economic viability don’t make it in the market. BA works to 

evaluate performance and cost benefits and create guidance for the industry on whether 

innovations are ready for “prime time,” both in practice and in the market. The following 

guidance was given regarding the current state of high performance hot water systems:
36 

• At this time, high efficiency gas water heating systems may not be worth the extra cost, 

especially in warm climates with higher ground water temperatures and lower hot water 

heating loads. HPWHs may have very favorable economics in areas with high electric 

rates and mild climates.

• Water heating efficiency improvements can contribute to whole-house energy savings if 

incremental system costs can be reduced to reflect incremental energy savings.

• Installed cost relative to standard systems are still too high. This may have to do with 

familiarity by plumbers, local competitive pricing, and lack of economies of scale. Cost 

trends with certain systems are headed in the right direction. Additional research is 

required to standardize and reduce installation costs.

• International markets are more successful because of economies of scale and desired use 

in space-constrained applications.

• There is a need to look at systems as a whole, including distribution. System interaction 

with whole house is not entirely understood and accounted for. 

• Concern about carbon monoxide problems, which are caused mainly by undersized vents 

and lack of combustion air. 

• On-bill financing is an important technique for improving water heating efficiency, since 

many cannot afford to pay the incremental cost for efficiency upfront. 

• Solar water heating systems look most promising for multifamily applications, since the 

loads are higher and a central system offers some cost savings relative to a single family 

system. 

• Point of use water heaters may be a good application for small loads located far from the 

water heater.

• If you can’t replace the water heater, look to load reduction options like low-flow fixtures 

and more efficient distribution systems as additional alternatives to achieve energy 

savings. 

Issue 5 – How Much Insulation is Too Much?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question: 

How do we define the cost-effective limit for improvements in enclosure efficiency?

Presentations were based on these desirable characteristics for solutions for determining the cost 

effectiveness of efficient enclosure systems: 

• Comparison of cost savings to cost of grid-supplied energy 

• Comparison of cost to finance energy upgrades to reductions in operating cost 

• Comparison of cost of efficiency savings to the cost of savings from renewable 

generation
37 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Decision-Making Approaches for Enclosure Insulation Levels; John Straube 

As the market becomes capable of delivering almost any range of enclosure R-value, making the 

decision of what R-value to specify has become more important. To avoid squandering resources 

and the need to retrofit a home again in the near future, a robust decision-making process is 

needed. This session presented the critical flaws with most economic models (highly uncertain 

cost inputs, no non-economic inputs) used in making this decision as well as alternative 

approaches (such as minimum thresholds, comfort and durability requirements, and marginal 

cost evaluations). Although more refined decision-making is the most common approach used to 

select enclosure component R-values, such methods are poorly understood or researched, and 

more study is required to ensure robustness. 

Optimizing High Levels of Insulation; Ren Anderson 

The residential efficiency marketplace can be very frustrating if you are a diligent comparison 

shopper interested in getting the most bang for your buck. Is doubling your wall R-value really a 

better investment than buying that new 200 mpg motorcycle? Is living good better than living the 

good life? While perfect answers to life’s persistent questions may not always be possible, 

consistent information about the core cost/performance tradeoffs associated with different 

efficiency investments can provide an excellent starting point for making informed decisions 

about the relative value of the different energy choices leading to the development of high 

performance homes. 

Cost Analysis Approach for Codes; Todd Taylor 

The U.S. Department of Energy has established a goal of 50% improvement in the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) relative to the 2006 IECC. The DOE, through its 

Building Energy Codes Program, is developing code change proposals to increase the code’s 

efficiency cost effectively. Toward that end, the DOE has developed a residential energy and 

cost analysis methodology. The methodology includes single and multifamily prototype building 

definitions for energy analysis, energy simulation assumptions and rules, an efficiency measure 

cost database/repository, and an economic assessment protocol. The economic assessment 

protocol results in three evaluation metrics applicable at various levels of geographic 

aggregation: life cycle cost, consumer cash flow, and simple payback. This presentation 

discussed the development and public vetting of the methodology, described its key 

characteristics, explained how the DOE will apply it to develop its own code proposals and 

evaluate the proposals of others, and discussed its use in evaluating new codes to assist states in 

their code adoption processes. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

BA experts agree that the question isn’t how much insulation is needed, but how much thermal 

control is needed? To answer this question, we must consider thermal bridging, thermal mass, 

and air leakage. There are minimal levels of thermal control needed for comfort and 

condensation reduction, but standards outlining optimal levels of insulation are currently lacking. 

The following guidance was provided on how to evaluate optimal levels of insulation, in the 

context of overall envelope performance:
38 

• Insulation performance is currently suboptimal due to thermal bridging and air leakage;

installation must be addressed in addition to insulation levels. 

• Homeowners should consider the price of energy over the life of the mortgage (25 year) 

and heat loss relative to insulation value. There is a declining rate of return. To 

understand current investment in insulation, you need understand future savings to 

current costs.

• Need to consider trade-offs and look at cash flow—mass market penetration requires 

lowest capital cost option.

• There are some mixed markets where code minimum requirements make sense and 

exceeding requirements does not, and others where there are huge opportunities for 

increased insulation (hot humid, hot dry, cold). Best practice guidance by market would 

be useful. 

• Codes might need to evolve from prescriptive to performance/house-specific and may 

need to address installation quality. Payback information by climate would be useful to 

states.

Issue 6 – Do Codes and Standards Get in the Way of High-Performance?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question: 

What gaps and barriers in codes, standards, and rating systems limit achievement of 50% 

homes? 

Presentations were based on these desirable characteristics for solutions resolving gaps and 

barriers in codes, standards, and rating systems: 

• Identification and documentation of building science driven risks and associated costs 

• Solution description in a form that can be adopted by consensus technical committee 

• Documentation of solution benefits. 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Challenges with Existing Home Mechanical Systems Codes: Examples from Florida; Janet 

McIlvaine 

Researchers have worked with affordable housing partners in 80 Florida retrofits in foreclosed 

homes ranging in efficiency improvement from 6% to 60%. All of the houses had mechanical 

systems with one centrally located return. The scopes of work that partners develop to solicit 

bids generally include language stating that all work shall be done in compliance with prevailing 

codes. Florida residential codes have absorbed building science strategies to improve whole 

house performance and reduce risk of building failures related to mismanagement of air, heat, 
39 

and moisture transport. For the mechanical system, these manifest as requirements for system 

sizing, design, and component selection; passive return air pathways; duct construction and 

sealing; avoidance of building cavities for air transport; and access around air handlers. These 

apply to all new homes, but not existing homes. This missed opportunity to improve system and 

whole house performance usually does not arise more than once in a decade. Since completion of 

the field study, researchers have worked with three partners to incorporate specific, code-parallel 

language into bid documents to ensure new construction standards are met, and documenting 

risks and barriers associated with requirements which would preclude widespread 

implementation.

Prescriptive Codes: A Cure or A Curse?; Pat Huelman 

Historically, most residential building codes and standards have been prescriptive-oriented. 

While they may be simpler to implement and easier to verify, they have difficulty dealing with 

complex, dynamic, and interactive systems, such as those in high performance houses. They also 

tend to be written around current technologies and practices. This approach has frequently led to 

overly conservative and restrictive solutions. Ultimately, it does not support breakthrough or 

leap-frog technologies. And, in the end, there are limited assurances that the desired performance 

outcomes are achieved. 

Impact of Codes on Potential PVC Duct System Solution; Duncan Prahl 

Thin wall polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe is inherently a desirable material for short-run, lowvolume air distribution systems in small diameters (4 inches). It is very cost competitive with 

sheet metal, is easy to cut and assemble in the field, and combined with solvent welding creates 

inherently airtight joints. In 6-inch diameters, polyethylene (PE) flexible corrugated pipe (used 

commonly for drainage) is cost competitive with standard insulated flex duct, is less prone to 

crushing or kinking, and would have a significantly longer projected service life. The I-Codes 

(IRC 2012 Section M1601.1.1; IMC 2012 Section 603.5) indicate ducts shall be constructed with 

Class 0 or Class 1 duct material and shall comply with UL181. UL Class 0 are air ducts and air 

connectors having surface burning characteristics of zero; UL Class 1 are air ducts and air 

connectors having a flame-spread index of not greater than 25 without evidence of continued 

progressive combustion and a smoke-developed index of not greater than 50. PVC and PE do not 

meet both of these requirements. Presumably, Class 0 or Class 1 duct is required so that, in the 

event of a fire and the ducts are burning, flame and noxious smoke will not be actively 

transported throughout the building. If this is the intent, then code language could be written that 

allows ducts to be of any material provided that the HVAC system was interconnected to a 

smoke alarm system so that when the smoke alarm was activated, the air distribution system 

would shut down. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

BA experts are highly engaged in the code development process and have extensive experience 

working in the field to understand code barriers to the use of new systems and design strategies. 

The following observations were made about codes and standards and their relationship to high 

performance construction techniques: 

• Fundamentally, in this order, codes should at least: 

o Not require the wrong thing 
40 

o Not prevent the right thing 

o Discourage the wrong thing 

o Encourage the right thing. 

• Current code is not always the problem, often it’s the interpretation of code. Better 

guidance for builders and code officials based on BA research results may be all that is 

needed in many cases. 

• Prescriptive codes are not well suited to complex, dynamic high-performance systems. 

Prescriptive codes are for single measures, performance codes are required for homes 

built with true building as a system/building science approach. Need performance-based 

code. However, it is still critical to ensure house-as-a-system building science measures 

because better insulated and tighter construction assemblies can have less tolerance for 

drying, and more risk for combustion safety issues. 

• New construction codes are reasonable. Codes for existing construction are challenging. 

• Sometimes, code isn’t the issue; it’s the sub-organizations referencing the code and their 

standards (i.e., BPI, ASHRAE, ANSI, ENERGY STAR, LEED). 

Issue 7 – What are the Best HVAC Solutions for Low-Load, High Performance 

Homes?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question: 

What components and controls are required to implement the “perfect,” cost-effective, 

production-level low-load space conditioning systems for all major U.S. climate regions? 

Presentations were based on these desirable characteristics for space conditioning system 

solutions: 

• Uniform distribution of comfort and ventilation air 

• Easy adaptation of system components for different climates, allowing for standardized 

system design approaches across all climates 

• Can be designed to meet the capacity requirements for 50% homes 

• Occurrences of lengthy episodes of high indoor relative humidity (RH) during periods 

with low sensible loads limited 

• Meets current mechanical code 

• Minimizes increases in labor and material cost compared to standard systems 

• Places ducts and air handlers in conditioned space 

• Based on actual vs. rated performance characteristics 

• Is flexible enough to meet a broad range of individual comfort preferences.
41 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Sensible and Latent Load Control with Centrally Ducted Variable Capacity Space 

Conditioning Systems in Low Sensible Load Environments; James Cummings 

Air conditioning (AC) systems are typically sized to meet the maximum cooling load during the 

hottest period of the (nearly) hottest day. Therefore, during 90%+ hours of the cooling season, 

the AC system is significantly oversized. It would be useful if the AC system could modulate its 

cooling capacity so that it remains operating for extended periods rather than cycling off after 

short “on” periods. This can improve both system efficiency and latent cooling performance. In 

homes with low sensible loads, latent cooling loads from induced ventilation and from internal 

moisture generation (e.g., respiration, perspiration, cooking, showers, dishwashing, plants, etc.) 

can exceed the latent cooling capacity of the AC system. It would be useful, therefore, if the 

system could modulate its sensible heat ratio (SHR) so that a reduced level of sensible load can 

produce an increased latent cooling capacity. A new generation of variable capacity AC and heat 

pump systems can satisfy both of these. One such product varies its capacity from 34% to 100% 

of maximum capacity and also has thermostat control algorithms, which modulate cfm/ton rates 

and allow greatly reduced SHR. These products can provide SEER ratings in the range of 20 to 

24.5, which can allow further enhancement to the already high energy efficiency of the house (or 

other building). 

HVAC for Low-Load Homes; John Straube 

Homes with very low heating and cooling demands are becoming common as a result of 

improved enclosure characteristics (insulation level, airtightness, and solar control) as well as 

changing housing characteristics (more multifamily housing, smaller housing size). Although 

this offers the potential of energy and cost savings, the range of optimal HVAC solutions begins 

to shift. In essentially all cases, the demand for domestic hot water becomes a larger proportion 

of the total energy load. This presentation reviewed the benefits, limitations, and caveats of using 

a number of systems, from air- and water-source heat pumps to mini-splits and tankless, 

instantaneous water heaters. 

Dual Integrated Appliances (Combi Systems); Ben Schoenbauer 

In new and existing homes, improved building envelopes have led to decreased space heating 

loads. At the same time, high efficiency water heating product lines with higher firing rates are 

being installed in an increasing number of homes. Instead of a separate furnace and a water 

heater, a packed combination system can be used to meet both space heating and water heating 

loads with a single, high efficiency thermal engine. These power or direct vented systems help 

solve the combustion safety issue. In addition, systems are now available that include whole 

house ventilation and advanced control of distribution air flow, water circulation flow, and 

temperature set-points, which can further improve efficiencies. 

Minimized Space Conditioning Distribution Strategies for Low-Load Homes; Dave Stecher 

The goal of this research is to define the characteristics of minimized space conditioning 

distribution strategies for low-load houses (retrofit or new construction) that meet industry 

comfort measures. The IBACOS team will assess the ability of each system to meet existing 

standards for temperature uniformity and stability. In the Fresno, California, Retrofit Unoccupied 
42 

Test House (hot-dry/mixed-dry), IBACOS installed a central space conditioning unit with no 

ducted distribution. The system as configured represents the characteristics of the lowestinstalled-cost market-available space conditioning equipment. Complete elimination of 

distribution ductwork is a key factor in the low installed cost of the system. The primary 

implementation issue with such a system is the risk of under-conditioning rooms that can be 

separated by doors from the space in which conditioned air is supplied. To help combat this 

issue, IBACOS had market-available, passive high- and low-wall vents installed in interior 

partition walls to enable air transfer to these rooms when the partition doors were closed. In the 

winter of 2011–2012, IBACOS performed computational fluid dynamics and other mathematical 

modeling to complement data collected from the test house. Field test data indicate the inability 

of these passive high- and low-wall vents as installed to provide sufficient air transfer to meet 

existing standards for temperature uniformity and stability. Due to the inability of this lowest 

cost strategy to meet existing standards for temperature uniformity and stability, the next leastcost options are being determined so that their performance will be evaluated. This field work 

and corresponding mathematical modeling will be used to draw larger conclusions for a variety 

of climatic regions and house configurations. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

The BA program evaluates the complete interactions between building systems, whole-house 

design, and manufactured products, and partners with industry to encourage the development of 

new systems to address the novel challenges of high performance homes. Such is the case with 

new HVAC systems to deal with the “problem” of extremely low loads. In lieu of new products 

to address the issue, BA experts provided the following guidance: 

• In some cases, appropriately sized systems can cost more, particularly for high 

performance homes. This is an area where the new construction market can help to 

achieve cost reductions via increased demand and corresponding economies of scale. 

Innovations in this area will not be driven by the replacement of retrofit market.

• Anecdotal evidence from manufacturers says it is more expensive to build a smaller 

furnace and perceived demand isn’t great enough to instigate the production of these 

products. The problem isn’t a technical challenge, but a market challenge.

• Decent heating solutions are available; the problem is air conditioning. Sensible and 

latent load control can be achieved with centrally ducted variable capacity space 

conditioning system in low sensible load environments. 

• Some believe the building science community should attempt to meet latent control 

objectives first with high efficiency A/C systems that are optimized for RH control and 

implement dehumidifiers only as a last resort because they are a very energy inefficient 

means for providing latent cooling (the most energy efficient dehumidifiers have a space 

heating COP of about 2.9). 

• Need smaller air handling units for low load homes and manufacturers are simply not 

making them. 

• Combination systems (dual integrated appliances) are good solutions. 

• Minimized space conditioning distribution strategies for low-load homes are needed 

along with good design guidance. 
43 

• Should minimize the need for supplemental dehumidification but this integrated function 

can increase equipment cost. 

• Need to consider domestic hot water when looking at low load HVAC as burner capacity 

is comparable. If a condensing hot water system is used, the space conditioning system 

must be designed to ensure a low enough return temperature to maintain condensation. 

• Distribution systems pose a problem as they must be designed for larger capacity even if 

not needed—we need non-standard equipment. 

• Ductless systems may work in smaller homes, but don’t address need for ventilation, 

filtration, or mixing. 

• The multifamily market is an excellent place to start as there’s a real market opportunity 

there for manufacturers and this may drive technical solutions that can be used in the 

residential market.

Issue 8 – Better Technology Doesn’t Always Win—How Can We Ensure That 

Doesn’t Happen to High Performance Homes?

Background 

In this session, presenters addressed this question: 

What market delivery solutions are most effective in communicating and validating the value of 

high performance home innovations? 

Presentations were based on these desirable characteristics that document market value: 

• Value to key participants in the value chain 

• Acceptance of innovation by experts and market leaders 

• Incremental whole house benefits that exceed incremental costs 

• Innovation that meets code and warranty requirements 

• Implementation guidelines compatible with production builder construction practices 

• Program participation that enhances builders’ business metrics. 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Winning with Co-opetition; Emanuel Levy 

Conventional wisdom is that the best strategy for getting better technologies accepted in the 

market is to find a business partner with the goal of using the technology to be more competitive, 

capturing market share. This is the thinking that shapes how many in the research community 

approach new technology development. This presentation suggested that having a business 

partner motivated by competitive advantage is, in many instances, counterproductive, and may 

stymy commercialization. Rather than appeal to the competitive instincts for industry, the 
44 

presentation argued that creating a cooperative research group of otherwise competing 

companies—an approach referred to as “co-opetition”— is a better formula for winning in the 

market and may ultimately provide a more appropriate structure for spending public funds. 

Communicating the Value of EE Research Results; Darren Harris 

Ensuring that the value of high performance home innovations is not lost or downplayed is 

critical to getting BA research results and innovations accepted and broadly implemented. 

However, communicating and validating innovations is not always as simple as it might seem, 

particularly when there are multiple stakeholders involved. Successfully doing so requires 

consideration, planning, and communication. A variety of communication tools can help to make 

sure the value of the innovations hits the right audiences and gains the desired attention. Web 

content, video, articles, white papers, and case studies can all be used as market delivery 

solutions. However, a combination of these types of communication will provide the best 

audience coverage. Media partnerships can help broadcast the message across multiple channels 

at a minimal cost. This presentation looked at developing successful partnerships with local 

stakeholders and media outlets to ensure broad acceptance of BA research results. 

Successful Marketing Practices of 30% Community Scale Builders; Stephanie Thomas-Rees 

Merely claiming energy use reduction is not enough for builders to sell a high performance 

product. Successful builders have implemented strategies that can be outlined in three steps: 1) 

show the customer that the features have benefits, 2) use show-and-tell type illustrations or mock 

ups to create a “hands on,” bonding experience with the customer, and 3) develop/enlist 

incentives, promotions, programs, and third party certifications that are offered to the customer. 

Recorded home sale statistics with respect to specifications of both BA builders and non-BA

builders were presented and further support that without advertising, marketing, or expending 

adequate resources to accompany their “value” added features, success is not realized. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

The following key comments and recommendations on the issue were gathered during the 

meeting:

• Encourage cooperative agreements between builders and have them use their collective 

purchasing power to convince manufacturers to produce suitable products, where they 

don’t already exist. 

• Start with community-scale in mind, using resources like local government programs and 

investors. Use obvious cash flow benefits up front in discussions. More energy efficient 

homes mean lower bills for struggling families, higher likelihood of loan payback, etc.

• Use marketing and sales techniques effectively, don’t discount them. 

Issue 9 – What are the Best Ventilation Techniques?

Background 

As building envelopes are built better, key innovations will be for systems that can provide 

improved indoor environmental quality (IEQ) robustly and with low energy impact. To do so, 

such systems must be responsive not only to occupants’ needs but also to the building and to 
45 

external conditions such as weather, outdoor air quality, and utility needs (e.g. smart grid). 

However, there is a lot of variation in expert recommendations. 

In this session, presenters addressed these questions: How do we address ventilation in all 

climates? What is the best compromise between occupant health and safety and energy 

efficiency? What is the most cost-effective approach? How much to ventilate? When to 

ventilate? What about ASHRAE 62.2? Do we agree? 

Proposed Solutions

Presenters developed the following abstracts prior to the meeting and provided the following 

recommendations regarding their topic: 

Emerging Innovations for IEQ; Max Sherman 

As building envelopes are built better, key innovations will be for systems that can provide 

improved indoor environmental quality (IEQ) robustly and with low energy impact. To do so, 

such systems must be responsive not only to occupants’ needs but also to the building and to 

external conditions such as weather, outdoor air quality, and utility needs (e.g., smart grid). The 

Residential Integrated Ventilation Energy Controller (RIVEC) was used as an example of such a 

potential technology. RIVEC modifies the ventilation rate of a home based on internal and 

external drivers to optimize energy use while still providing the same effective ventilation. 

Other, less developed IEQ innovations were also mentioned such as the development of high 

performance range hoods and new dehumidification systems. 

Thoughts on ASHRAE 62.2; Joe Lstiburek 

ASHRAE 62.2 does not encourage good ventilation systems and, in fact, promotes inefficient 

ventilation systems that result in poor indoor air quality. A critique of exhaust, balanced and 

supply ventilation systems and the basis of source control and dilution of contaminants are 

presented in a historical context. Recommendations on moving forward are provided. 

Expert Comments and Recommendations

This session raised many interesting questions, which were discussed in depth by experts. 

Research is ongoing in order to provide more justification for either side of the argument. The 

following presents raw notes from the session, capturing our experts’ varying positions on 

ventilation: 

Max Sherman 

• Providing good indoor environmental quality is what buildings are all about 

• Better buildings need ventilation because air doesn’t flow without it 

• Failures to ventilate will become more of a problem as buildings get bigger 

• ASHRAE 62 is the only national consensus standard document there is - follow 62.2, 

resistance if futile. Makes no sense for someone to suggest guidance that is contrary to 

62.2 

• Ventilation is more like a structural requirement, not like comfort, should not be up to 

occupants 

• A good solution is a double duty fan: local and whole house exhaust 
46 

• Have a good range hood, no standards, but cooking may be biggest source of 

contaminants 

• If we could rate range hoods as to how good they capture pollutants, we could do good 

ventilation there 

• Design for a good filter (MERV11); can have significant pressure drops

• Exhaust fans tend to work—they are low cost, don’t tend to clog, and exhaust 

contaminants directly

• Not a market readiness issues w/ 62.2, perhaps some w/ next step (re: range hoods) 

• More consistent ventilation w/ exhaust because it’s unbalanced, less sensitive to 

enclosure leakage than balanced systems

• Depressurization in super-tight houses, exhaust only does not control where air is coming 

from (not problem in leaky house) 

• No particular advantage of supply-only systems in hot humid climate zones 

• In extreme climates, an energy recovery ventilator (ERV) or heat recovery ventilator 

(HRV) can be cost effective if done right 

• Technologies not quite ready for “prime time” include: 

o Automated range hoods 

o Chemical air cleaning 

o Smart ventilation controllers 

o IAQ controllers 

o Ultralow pressure drop filters (nanotech development under way). 

Joe Lstiburek 

• Don’t promulgate standards that can’t be achieved by reasonable people doing reasonable 

things 

• Passivhaus standard of 0.6 is excessive: People don’t realize how difficult 0.6 is. We’ve 

built houses to 0.5 with balanced vent, but dryer exhaust doesn’t work, bath exhaust 

doesn’t work. 

• To get to 3 air changes per hour (ACH) you follow the thermal bypass checklist. A little 

more work, “not an extraordinary amount” and you get to 1.5, but not sure it makes 

sense.

• Built tight (3 ACH), ventilate right—production level 

• Ventilate right: 

o Balanced, energy recovery, distribution, source control 

o Dilution not solution to indoor formaldehyde pollution 

• Worst: leaky, with exhaust ventilation and no distribution 
47 

• Only benefit is this (exhaust only ventilation) is that it’s cheap, if you want cheap put in 

that double duty fan. 

Other observations: 

• 10 minutes of vent distribution adequate in Joe’s experience w/ exhaust

• May be able to couple single-point exhaust with some supply 

• Multipoint exhaust is a step up from single point 

• 100 cfm exhaust vs. 100 cfm balanced exhaust will have diff effectiveness

• Recommend humidity range: 25% RH winter, 70% RH in summer (current 20-60, 

arbitrary and capricious)

• New ASHRAE change impact is from 50-90 cfm (7.5 cfm + 0.1 to 0.3 cfm/sq ft)

• BSC designs systems to meet 62.2, regularly at 1.5 times, but cx systems at 60% because

they are balanced with distribution, then give control to occupant (structural analogy is 

wrong, sizing of HVAC is correct analogy, standard procedure to size then let occupant 

control) 

• Joe believes 62.2 discourages good systems currently 

• Exhaust system has to operate at 2x rate as balanced system

• Haven’t seen good studies on pollutants on house 

o Need $20-30 million for big study in American houses and health effects 

o Current pollutant numbers aren’t based on real science. 

Discussion between panelists and the audience: 

• There was agreement that a 3 ACH is not “too tight” 

• Does not vary by climate

• So easy for production builder to get to 3, don’t argue about it, just do the checklists. 

Sam (facilitator): We have two very different expert opinions on ventilation guidance. 

Joe: Didn’t say exhaust only 62.2 doesn’t work, just not as good. Both systems will work, 

questions of cost, effectiveness, and energy impacts (nobody dies, nothing rots, we’re ok). 

Max: Don’t agree with Joe’s 1⁄2 number, we have data to show that, he proposed to 62.2. 

Infiltration credit: originally in, wanted to get back to no credit standard (originally at 0.3 ACH). 

In response to the 0.1 or 0.3 sq ft requirement: 

In Quebec city: majority of community thought infiltration was unreliable. 

7.5 + 0.1/sq ft = 10-12 cfm, Max was concerned because people expect ~15 cfm, workaround is 

0.2 infiltration credit 
48 

• Until the HERS industry started blower doors showing the infiltration credit wouldn’t 

apply according to Sherman-Grimsrud model, so infiltration credit won’t apply. 

• If credit goes away, then need to increase vent rate. 

• Some people happy credit went away, but not happy with number. 

Joe: I believe infiltration is unreliable and should not be counted, Max does. 

Joe: Annual average exposures are the wrong way of doing things. 

Sherman-Grimsrud good for average energy, not for determining indoor air quality. 

• Both saying to follow 62.2, all the systems we’ve proposed will work. 

• “Have not done the necessary homework as an industry” to determine what the rates need 

to be. 

Failure modes:

Blockage of supply, ERVs in wet rooms. 

Blockage a real concern, make sure inlet is inspectable and fixable. 

Joe: Exhaust systems don’t know where air is coming from, which I think big deal, need to think 

about filters on supply/balanced. 

• What is the best option for clean environment: place where you can pick where air 

coming from and can filter, or place where you have no idea? Systems require 

maintenance. 

• Most reliable approach, connect to your AC or furnace or better yet, figure out a way to 

connect to your hot water! 

Joe: If I was a production builder I wouldn’t do ERV, do exhaust w/ mixing our OA to return 

side w/ ECM motor mixing a big deal because it homogenizes comfort. 

Joe: In hot humid climate, Joe thinks already at edge at 7.5 + 0.1/sq ft, we’re over and need 

dehumidification. 

Joe: What about passive vent options? We don’t have a history of this, done in Europe. Worth 

exploring and researching. Need sustainable vent systems without lots of fan power or when 

power goes out. Radon: don’t want to depressurize, need to consider other things. 
49 

3 Stakeholder Recommendations for Building America

Meeting participants had the following recommendations for additional support from the BA 

program: 

Issue 1 – How Do We First Do No Harm with High-R Enclosures?

• Need solid builder guides, specific solutions guidance; codes cannot do it all. Should 

include a checklist or tools to conduct an if/then cost/tradeoff analysis of varying energy 

measures.

• Update vapor retarder guidance for a broader range of enclosure systems so that 

innovative systems can be used without risk of failure. 

Issue 2 – What Emerging Innovations are the Key to Future Homes? 

• BA needs to verify performance of highly insulating primary windows and low-e storm 

windows. Right now, it is hard to get the cost down because there is a lack of regional 

distribution. 

• Study shading impacts on cooling; interior shades vs. exterior sun shade options. 

• Evaluate how ductless hydronic compares to low cost heat pumps with high seasonal 

energy efficiency ratio (SEER) and high heating seasonal performance factor (HSPF). 

• Create guidance on how to deal with historic window replacement. 

Issue 3 – HVAC Proper Installation Energy Savings: Over-Promising or Under- Delivering?

• Refrigerant systems are complex—true problems are often difficult to identify. There are 

few simple and reliable diagnostic procedures for refrigerant charge and there is poor 

quality of diagnostics due to uncalibrated test equipment, poorly trained technicians, and 

poor procedures. New approaches are needed. 

• Could develop a checklist and label to certify proper equipment installation. 

Issue 4 – Are High-Efficiency Hot Water Heating Systems Worth the Cost?

• Evaluate smaller units to support smaller loads (smaller water heating loads from energy 

star appliances and low flow shower heads and water faucets). 

• Emerging low-cost solar water heating systems look promising for multifamily 

applications. Installation costs and maintenance costs are still big barriers to broad use of 

high performance systems. Innovations in these areas will provide large benefits. 

Issue 5 – How Much Insulation is Too Much? 

• Need recommended Best Practices Guidance based on current and future costs.
50 

• Additional innovations are required to reduce the cost and increase the reliability of 

fasteners for cladding over insulating sheathing and high performance approaches to 2x4 

framing systems.

Issue 6 – Do Codes and Standards Get in the Way of High-Performance?

• BA to continue to inform codes of validated, cost-effective, low-risk techniques to save 

energy.

• Could produce a Building America guide for code officials. This guide would show code 

officials how novel approaches to building science do not go against code. The Measure 

Guidelines and Strategy Guidelines already provide a good foundation for this. 

• BA code commentary to coordinate with ICC. 

Issue 7 – What are the Best HVAC Solutions for Low-Load, High Performance Homes?

• BA should work with multifamily developers and work with manufacturers to make that 

important connection. 

Issue 8 – Better Technology Doesn’t Always Win—How Can We Ensure That Doesn’t Happen 

to High-Performance Homes?

• Be mindful of the impact of compelling technical sales information and tools to 

communicate value of energy efficiency and innovation to contractors and their 

customers.

Issue 9 – What are the Best Ventilation Techniques?

• Complete additional work to gain clarity, consensus, and guidelines. 
51 

4 Presenter Biographies

Dr. Ren Anderson manages the NREL Residential Research Group, a crosscutting team of 30 

scientists and engineers that evaluates the impacts of innovative energy systems on residential 

energy demand. Ren is a recipient of patents focusing on advanced heat and mass transfer 

devices for building and vehicle applications and has received several awards, including the 

President’s Award for Exceptional Performance in 1993, Outstanding Accomplishment Award 

for the Thermal Test Facility in 1996, and an NREL Director’s and DOE EERE Assistant 

Secretary’s Award in 2008 for his support of rebuilding efforts in Greensburg, Kansas. 

Richard Baker supports and leads projects that help homebuilders prevent and control risk. In 

this role at IBACOS, he conducts proactive, in-field quality assessments for builders, produces 

reports on the best and worst practices, and compiles details to enable builders to make 

improvements. He has studied green construction practices through the U.S. Green Building 

Council (USGBC) and National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). He is an NAHB 

Certified Green Professional and an Accredited Verifier for the NAHB National Green Building 

Program. Rich received his master’s and bachelor’s degrees in architecture from the State 

University of New York at Buffalo. 

Dan Cautley manages and conducts research investigating the energy performance of buildings 

at the Energy Center of Wisconsin. His work focuses on the field performance of building 

systems—walls, windows, foundations—and mechanical systems and appliances. 

James Cummings has worked with Florida Solar Energy Center (FSEC) for over 20 years and 

has extensive experience lecturing, training, and developing training materials and programs on 

the topics of energy use, air flows, duct leakage, diagnostic methods, and indoor air quality. He 

developed diagnostic test methods and protocols for characterization of airflows, building air 

barriers, and building zone pressure mapping and carried out field and lab research identifying 

the nature, extent, and consequences of duct leakage and other forms of uncontrolled air flow in 

residences and commercial buildings. 

Tim Hanes has been working in the energy efficiency world for the past 14 years. He is the vice 

president of ESI, Inc., as well as a partner of Cenergy, LLC, the largest home energy consulting 

firm in the state of Iowa. As a RESNET certified rater, Tim specializes in the whole house 

approach to energy efficiency. With the NCI Air Balancing certification, Tim has been able to 

implement HVAC system performance testing and analysis into Cenergy’s service offering. Tim 

is regularly consulted by industry professionals on his approach to field testing and analysis of 

HVAC systems. He is a certified geothermal installer and a member of the Iowa Ground Source 

Heat Pump Association (IGSPA). Tim is also a trainer for NCI and is frequently asked to speak 

at energy-efficiency related conferences and events around the country. 

Darren Harris has more than 15 years of experience in marketing, business development, and 

public relations in the building products industry. His experience overseeing operations for a 

startup media company, his expertise creating and developing online demonstration projects, and 

his skill in forming partner-ships with government agencies, building product manufacturers, and 

associations makes him a valuable resource to clients. Darren has prior experience as public 
52 

relations manager for The Engineered Wood Association trade group and worked as a reporter 

and editor at McGraw-Hill’s Construction Information Group in Seattle. 

Marc Hoeschele, PE, is an engineering manager at Davis Energy Group (DEG). He specializes 

in technology evaluations, systems monitoring, and California Title 24 codes and standards 

development. Marc has developed a research emphasis in domestic water heating and advanced 

residential space conditioning and currently heads BA’s Hot Water Standing Technical 

Committee. Marc joined DEG in 1984 after earning a master’s degree from the University of 

California at Davis and a bachelor’s degree in civil and environmental engineering from Cornell 

University. 

Pat Huelman is an associate professor in residential energy and building systems in the 

Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering at the University of Minnesota and 

serves as coordinator of the Cold Climate Housing Program. He is the lead faculty for the 

Residential Building Science and Technology undergraduate degree, a principal investigator for 

hygrothermal testing at the Cloquet Residential Research Facility, and is directing the 

NorthernSTAR Building America Team. 

Vladimir Kochkin: As Director of Applied Engineering for the NAHB Research Center, 

Vladimir Kochkin oversees engineering research programs covering structural, environmental, 

and energy performance of residential construction. He also manages the ANSI process for the 

development of the National Green Building Standard. He serves on or is active with various 

building code and standard development committees. Vladimir also manages laboratory testing 

programs for innovative and conventional construction systems. 

Emanuel Levy is President of The Levy Partnership, a building systems consulting firm and the 

team lead for the Building America Advanced Residential Integrated Energy Solutions (ARIES) 

consortium. He also serves as the Executive Director of the Systems Building Research Alliance 

(SBRA). Since 2000, SBRA has served as the U.S. EPA’s national quality assurance provider for 

the ENERGY STAR manufactured and modular home programs, thus far awarding ENERGY 

STAR labels to nearly 30,000 factory built homes. Mr. Levy has advanced degrees in 

architecture from Syracuse University and Carnegie- Mellon University. He is a registered 

architect in New York State, has served as a member of the National Institute of Building 

Sciences Consultative Council, and is on the board of Next Step, a non-profit organization 

creating innovative and sustainable housing solutions for low-income families. 

Joseph Lstiburek, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., Ph.D., P.Eng., is a principal of Building Science 

Corporation and an Adjunct Professor of Building Science at the University of Toronto. Dr. 

Lstiburek received an undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering from the University of 

Toronto, a master’s degree in civil engineering from the University of Toronto, and a doctorate 

in building science at the University of Toronto. Dr. Lstiburek has been a licensed professional 

engineer since 1982. Dr. Lstiburek lives and works in Boston. He is an ASHRAE Fellow. 

Terry Mapes is a Certified Energy Manager (CEM) who joined PNNL in 2009 and has had a 

primary role in more than 20 projects. In addition to his role as project manager for the 

Department of Energy’s High Performance Windows Volume Purchase Program, he is currently 

involved in several projects within the Building Energy Codes Program. 
53 

Janet McIlvaine: Since 1990, Janet McIlvaine has been a research analyst at the Florida Solar 

Energy Center (FSEC) with an emphasis on energy efficiency for affordable housing. Since the 

fall of 2009, FSEC has been working on deep energy retrofits with local government and nonprofit housing entities in central Florida. Partners have achieved 30% or more improvement in 

HERS Index in over 50 homes. 

Garrett Mosiman is a research fellow at the Center for Sustainable Building Research at the 

University of Minnesota. He holds a bachelor of architecture degree from Rice University and a 

master’s in architecture from the University of Minnesota. Prior to returning to school in 2006, 

Garrett worked for 10 years as a carpenter, architectural model builder, furniture maker, project 

manager, and architectural designer in Texas and Minnesota. His primary field of expertise is 

sustainable materials and their use in durable building assemblies that honor the principles of 

sound building science. Other areas of interest include light pollution mitigation, urban 

hydrology, architectural acoustics, and energy efficiency. Garrett has served in many roles at 

CSBR, with a primary focus on energy efficiency in residential and commercial buildings. 

Duncan Prahl has over 11 years of experience at IBACOS assisting builders and developers 

with implementing high performance housing using Building America research results. His 

research focuses on process-related barriers in most builders’ organizations with the goal of 

creating new process models for builders. He is a registered architect in New York. 

Ben Schoenbauer is a research engineer at the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) in 

Minnesota. At CEE, Ben has been conducting research projects dealing with residential and 

commercial energy efficiency for the past four years, including work as part of the 

NorthernSTAR Building America team. Ben has a master’s degree in mechanical engineering 

from the University of Minnesota and a bachelor’s degree in physics from St. John’s University. 

Max Sherman is a senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and 

leads the Energy Performance of Buildings group. He is an ASHRAE Distinguished Fellow and 

focuses his research on energy and indoor air quality aspects of air inside homes including air 

tightness, ventilation, infiltration, and thermal distribution.

David Springer is president and co-founder of Davis Energy Group (DEG), a 31-year-old 

mechanical engineering firm specializing in building energy efficiency. He has managed DEG’s 

participation in the Building America program for 10 years and currently leads the Alliance for 

Residential Building Innovation (ARBI) team. David has authored 18 papers and articles on 

energy subjects and holds six patents. He serves on two ASHRAE committees, SPC 152R 

(residential distribution) and TC 6.5 (radiant heating and cooling). He earned his B.S. from UC 

Davis in Biological Science in 1973. 

Dave Stecher leads IBACOS’s research effort in innovative space conditioning strategies for 

low load homes that are economical to install and provide equal or better occupant comfort than 

traditional methods. Dave has a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering and 7 years of 

experience in low-load building design, implementation, and performance assessment. 

John Straube is a principal of Building Science Corporation and a professor of building science 

in the Civil Engineering Department and School of Architecture at the University of Waterloo, 
54 

Canada. Dr. Straube has acted as an educator, researcher, consultant, and expert witness on 

energy efficiency, durability, and IAQ. Current interests include the optimal system design of 

buildings, sustainable buildings, and moisture problem avoidance. 

Z. Todd Taylor is a senior research engineer at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 

specializing in building energy analysis, residential energy code development, large-scale 

building energy simulation, and analysis of large energy datasets. For more than 25 years, Todd 

has developed energy saving building codes including the International Energy Conservation 

Code, ASHRAE Standard 90.2, manufactured housing energy standards, federal residential 

standards, and Pacific Northwest regional codes. 

Stephanie Thomas-Rees is a research architect in the Buildings Research Division at the Florida 

Solar Energy Center (FSEC), where she has been involved with high performance buildings 

research since 2001. She currently is a member of the Building America Partnership for 

Improved Residential Construction, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, where she 

conducts research and provides technical assistance to the home building industry to improve the 

environmental performance. She is a board member of the Florida Green Building Coalition and 

Green Home Certifying Agent.

Dr. Iain Walker is a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. He has more than 20 

years of experience as a building scientist and consultant, conducting research on energy use, 

ventilation, moisture, performance simulation, and commissioning/diagnostic issues in 

residential buildings. His current work focuses on retrofits, zero/low energy homes, and HVAC 

systems in residential buildings through field and laboratory evaluations, modeling and 

simulation activities, and standards setting. He is Executive Editor and member of the board of 

Home Energy magazine. He is the task group leader for ASTM standards committees on 

building and duct system air leakage and seal-ant longevity. He is an ASHRAE fellow and serves 

on several ASHRAE Standards committees. He also serves on Building Performance Institute 

and RESNET Technical Committees as well as the Affordable Comfort conference planning 

committee and provides leadership and technical input to many local, state, national, and 

international bodies. 

Sarah Widder works at the DOE’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, where she focuses 

on the application of technology, standards, and regulations to meet sustainable design, energy 

efficiency, and greenhouse gas management goals. Some of her current projects involve 

researching innovative and cost-effective solutions for improving energy efficiency in residential 

buildings with the Building America Program. She is also helping DOE meet energy efficiency 

goals through more stringent standards for appliance energy consumption as well as performing 

analysis to understand the overall sustainability impacts of energy-related choices using life 

cycle assessment and other sustainability assessment tools. 
DOE/GO-102012-3806▪ October 2012

Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing at 

least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post-consumer waste.