ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
2023 Net Zero vs Passive House explained + BC Energy Step Code
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ส.ค. 2024
- This video is a conversational guide to understanding the differences and similarities to the common approaches to building high performance homes.
Both Prescriptive and Performance standards have their place, but they take different paths to achieving their results.
Passive House Certification Criteria:
Heating Demand Limit 15 kWh/ m2 per year
Heating Load Limit 10 W/m2
Cooling Load Limit 10 W/m2
Air Tightness Result 0.6 Air Changes / Hour (Pressurization)
0:00 Introductions
0:29 Passive House has become a symbol
1:02 Performance Standard vs Prescriptive Standard
1:25 BC Energy Step Code Explained
1:58 Air Changes per Hour
2:30 What it means to be Net Zero
3:17 Passive House is a Performance Based Standard
3:58 Energy Demand vs Energy Load
4:58 Passive House Air Changes per Hour Target
5:35 Why create an Air-barrier
6:40 Net Zero is a Prescriptive Standard
7:15 Passive House tends to prefer simple elegant designs
7:42 Typical House designs add complexity to energy performance
8:45 The challenges we saw with a prescriptive standard
12:07 Where prescriptive standards break down
13:24 Net Zero in action
14:40 You can build a solar farm to compensate for inefficient home
15:30 The technicality of Net Zero between house design
16:08 Passive house can be Net Zero
17:02 The bottom line for us as a company
18:00 We can do Net Zero homes now
![[Full Episode] MasterChef Junior Thailand มาสเตอร์เชฟ จูเนียร์ ประเทศไทย Season 3 Episode 9](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jsjwpd_ER8g/mqdefault.jpg)
Loved your presentation, and I felt you did it well. Dumbing down (for the lack of a better term) higher-level concepts is an art form. Not everyone can do that. Keep it up!
Thanks Jack. I have certainly tried to distil the essence of the matter for people. It was, and continues to be a complex journey forward so I wanted to share what we had learned so far. Glad you liked it!
Appreciate your info. We’re in the mix of this now w/ our engineers/architects in deciding between continuing to build our house to passive home standard or “just” a net zero-net positive /extreme HERS level. The catch is passive home certification is NOT a “real thing” it’s more so a private organization standard & they give their private organizations stamp of approval on it. “Passive Home” seems to have been hijacked & turned into a profit making business of certification sales & has been made intentionally overly complicated. Unfortunately we found out when you build to these passive standards you’re building it for YOU, not the financial value of it. Appraisals add $0 value & typical buyers do not care & won’t get you the payback on the high cost of the effort.
The tension is real, and you are not the only one experiencing it! While I am aware of buyers that are actually quite keen to buy a "passive house" on the resale market - because they recognize it as a mark of quality construction. ... im not sure that the market and offset the added expense of construction.
Plainly stated, I think the best value is to build a "Net-Zero" house because thats where all the jurisdictional language is - and thats the trends. - but have your plans run thought the PHPP energy modelling software!
Paying for the certification adds lots of expense... and diminishing returns to the project.
Here is where Passive House does it better than Net Zero..... They do a comprehensive review of the entire project for its real energy performance and most importantly HYGENE CRITERIA. There is a review of installed U-values, Ventilation Rates, Temperature Gradients, and thermal bridges.... which will help avoid the challenges that lots of "high performance/ net-zero" are going to have!
I expect there to be a lot of mold issues that result from people adding insulation in a way that inhibits the drying potential of wall assemblies as they press towards net-zero.
I would suggest that you get you "net zero" home. energy modelled by a Certified Passive house consultant - that is using the PHPP - because that will be a window into your design, and it will not require you to pay the additional money to get it certified - nor will it obligate you to reach there standards... but it will allow you to see through a much more comprehensive analysis then simply HOT2000 for example.
@@levelupstrategies thanks man appreciate your insight. Just spoke w/ Passive home certifier & energy consultant and he actually said the same thing about going the Net zero route. We’re going that route as we feel it makes the most logical & will accomplish our goal.
Up to now...
But in the following years it will begin to matter to home buyers and for appraisals.
I get the same question every week, in France. Your teaching process step by step is very useful to streamline my own ’explanation’ to clients. Thanks
Thank you for the video. Passive house is beyond about efficient energy performance…it's really about achieving thermal comfort through throughtful building envelop details.
Truly, you are absolutely right. And I don't think those benefits get enough attention. It is the thoughtfulness that really distinguishes Passive House from other approaches.
Passive Haus is only for the wealthy. I’m a former remodeler but on fixed income these days. I can buy a new window or a roll of insulation every once in a while but will never do a whole house project again. How will homes meet the standards if nobody can afford it?
Thank you for the clarity. Your explanation brought it all together for me.
Your welcome.
Terminology is really complicated and important for these topics, good on you for doing such a thorough presentation!
We recently renovated a 70s home to what I'd call "Net-One Month," where we took more of a generation-based approach. I had looked into redoing all the siding with added external insulation, or spray foaming the entire house, even looked into geothermal. In the end, we did pretty much everything that was viable, and maybe a little more.
It would have been really fun to try from scratch to include many more of the passive principles. People definitely should if building.
Good for you for taking steps on your home with the things that were viable! it can really be intimidating to do a high-performance renovation with so many opinions on what to do - and how to do it.
Building from scratch does provide some unique advantages - but the retrofit side is where we as a community have a ton of potential to shape things for a brighter future.
Thanks for sharing your personal experience! I think people are looking for examples of people who have chosen to take steps like what you have :)
Totally relatable! Thank you very much. (Subscribed)
Thank you for such informative presentation!
A very good explanation of the two.
Great content. Thanks for the presentation. Took me a while to follow along with the firefighter analogy until you got to “chubby house” and it clicked. It’s tricky because the step code appears performance based, but the 2018 reference house is indeed prescribed.
Thanks again, hope you’re staying safe in Kelowna. Best wishes from Nanaimo.
The right units are the following: space heating demand max. 15 kWh/m2a or heating load max. 10 W/m2
Very helpful!
Glad you think so! It took me some time to wrap my head around the topics so I am glad the content was useful for you.
great info!!!
Glad it was helpful!
Loving the video... but you need a mic that is not so strong. I am heading the marker and it brings chills down my spine. Lol
Thanks for the feedback.
Very nice
My wife and I are currently in the middle of this right now. We are building a new home and most of the online floorplans are not designed with any thoughts about performance home building. We found a local architect to modify the floorplan that we like and to help us with designing our new home. We don't want just a basic rectangle house but we are keeping the design in mind. Most of the architects/ builders in my area don't want to change or build more efficient. If they do, then they want to charge significantly higher just because it is not the norm---not because of just the costs. So there will have to be designs/builders/manufacturers to make it easier for the majority of the homes being built to go to more performing homes.
It is very expensive to build a net zero home, let alone the added costs for passive standards. We currently live in a regular built home in 2017 with a 12.6kw solar system. Last year the solar system offset my power by 80 percent. Now that we are building a new home, we are going to build net zero as our goal.
Our goals are to build a more efficient, tighter, cleaner home for our family. Our architect actually went thru the numbers of SIP, ICF, 2x4 and 2x6 with ZipR6. SIP was almost twice the cost and ICF even more. The most cost effective per R value was the 2x6 with fiberglass insulation with approx=R25.--Southeastern US. I could swap the fiberglass insulation with rockwool batt and make it R29. A little more cost but worth it in my opinion. We will be using Heat Pump HVAC with ERV and dehumidifier. Sealed crawlspace and attic. We will have a hybrid water heater, high efficient windows/doors.
This to me is a much better than a code house and will future-proof our investment.
Steven, I really appreciate your dialogue on the topic! You're voicing some of the biggest issues I have seen across the industry as we move towards NetZero.
The reluctance of many of the common trades simply adds costs, delays, and frustration to the well intended process of building more energy efficient homes.
I will add that there are some common practices that are causing a lot of trouble with trapping moisture in the walls because of how the vapour barriers are installed. - so my caution is to be VERY careful if you are using a vapour barrier behind your drywall (on the inside of the house).
The "drying potential" of the whole wall needs to be considered with regards to your specific climate zone, because as you move up in R-Value, you also decrease the ability of your walls to dry. 'Variable Vapour permeance' assemblies will be your golden ticket to stay out of trouble in the long run.
Also, I took Dr. Joseph Lstiburek's online training this summer, and pound for bound will be the best money you spend to get ahead of issues in your build. - You can tell him Brandon from Kelowna sent you :)
I stuck the link to his next seminar in the bottom of this comment.
Please feel free to weigh in on your progress for your project. You are not alone with the challenges you are facing - but you are also not alone on the path to building a better home for the future!
www.buildingscience.com/events/building-science-fundamentals-5
Please don’t use fossil fuel derived insulation to save on renewable energy...
- from a Certified passive house architect, natural building materials "expert", specialized in passive retrofitting , etc, France
Ps consulting or architectural studies for passive house and or NZ houses is more costly because it needs more time, higher trained people, and very close qttention in schematics, building details and during the execution.
I am designing my house right now. I have looked into passive. One major concern is the amount of capital CO2 in higher step and passive houses. Some of the research I reviewed claims that 60 to 85% of the CO2 emissions comes from the materials used and construction. So even if you produce zero CO2 in the running of the house, it still has a big CO2 footprint. A passive house uses more material and takes more time to construct which increases an already high initial footprint. You can go with mainly wood products like Gutex and Accoya to act as a CO2 sink but similar products are not produced locally. The materials are expensive to start with and have high shipping costs which also reduces the CO2 sink. I think local producers have to start manufacturing products locally to cut shipping and material costs.
I am still not sure if passive house is the right way to go but I guess you have to start somewhere. I priced out Gutex, CLT, and Accoya. You are looking at a premium in the order of $400 000CDN for a 2500 sq ft house. So it is currently out of the picture without some major grant.
The carbon capital conversation is largely a distraction from the more important element of an efficient house.
One example I use, is of course ceramic dishware used more carbon to produce and deliver to your home than plastic/paper plates. You still probably don't rely on disposable dishware. If you extended the carbon footprint of a dishwasher into that equation, one could be convinced the better thing to do is just continue to use paper plates. Really, it's just a small upfront cost in doing business.
Those things should be lower, and will get lower, but it shouldn't hold you back.
@@ShortVersion1 The problem with the analogy is that the construction of the house is 60 to 85% of the life cycle carbon. If you don't use carbon sink materials when constructing a passive house, the increased carbon foot print is more than the carbon produced for heating/cooling a typical house over the life cycle. In your analogy, the plastic and paper ware consumes more resources than the production of the ceramic dishware and that is generally not the case for a passive house.
If the goal is to reduce carbon, you need to use materials that consume carbon and those materials are generally not that readily available or economically viable in North America. We have to have things like Gutex and Accoya shipped from long distances at really high costs. CLT is just really expensive.
net zero, if you can buy your way into it rather than design your way to it like passive is fundamentally the major flaw of net zero. from a stronger sustainability point of view, net zero is a very weak attempt at resource conservation.
Seems like the European problem is their energy is hard to get and extremely expensive compared to what we get outside of Europe, especially in America. They get a lot more techy stuff too like heat pump dryers etc...
But for sure in the north American continent it makes a lot more sense to make a normal house more efficient and possibly use solar panels instead. Here personally I'll be building a nice house that would actually have decent resale value to input cost and do a small solar array with a wood stove back up and a rain water system. Seems like purpose built up front without the extra utilities could actually pay off.
Very informative. Thankyou.
I was just wondering do we need to do any kind of cources or certification as a builder to build a Net zero house in British Columbia ?
The answer to that is Yes - but not for the Net Zero part. In order to build any house in BC you need to be a licensed builder with a New Home Warranty insurance provider.
If you choose to build a Net-zero home - there is no extra certification to do from a builders perspective. But I would say that there are training that would make that process easier. - like Passive House Consultant course, or Building Science.com training with Dr. Joseph.
I've taken both and would recommend them both!
I was sure something had to be wrong with your units, since the consumption per anum can't be that low. You've messed up little bit passive house demand, it's 15 KWh/m2. For an average American house of 2000 sqft = 185 m2 it's about 2,8 MWh per anum. It's still a extremely low value. I have very low energy house built 10 years ago (Della/Ytong aircrete, 160mm polystyrene insulation, triple pane windows, recuperating ventilation,..) and I use about 3 - 4 times more energy for heating per anum.
Oakld, yes you are right I was stumbling with my units once I was in front of the camera. Thanks for being on the look out for misinformation.
Passive House standards are super high, and here are the exact specs.
passivehouse-international.org/index.php?page_id=150
Space Heating Demand : not to exceed 15kWh annually OR 10W (peak demand) per square metre of usable living space
Space Cooling Demand: roughly matches the heat demand with an additional, climate-dependent allowance for dehumidification
Primary Heating Demand: not to exceed 120kWh annually for all domestic applications (heating, cooling, hot water and domestic electricity) per square meter of usable living space
Air Tightness: maximum of 0.6 air changes per hour at 50 Pascals pressure (as verified with an onsite pressure test in both pressurised and depressurised states)
Thermal Comfort: Thermal comfort must be met for all living areas year-round with not more than 10% of the hours in any given year over 25°C*
There are also some restrictions that they refer to as "Hygene Criteria" that are meant to address potential condensation & mold issues within the thermal profile of the assembly design.
@@levelupstrategies Yes, that's the standard I peeked at once I sensed something is not exactly right. I cited only the part relevant for that particular demand. But don't get me wrong, I think you do a very good job explaining that! :-)
So helpful!!! I’m in the States and looking for Passive House experts in the Virginia, Maryland, DC area. Any suggestions?
I would recommend that you start with Passive House U.S.
www.phius.org
I had a great podcast interview with Al Mitchel from PHIUS if you want to hear from them first hand.
netzero2hero.podbean.com/e/eps-2-al-mitchell-from-phius/
I am confident they will guide you to a professional you can trust!
@@levelupstrategies thanks so much! I will listen to the podcast with much interest. thanks for all you do !!
Take a look for german Passiv house Institut. Find a lot Basics. Company for certificatet products. Doors. Windows. Climasystems. Recoverysystems. How a wall should look like....👍🇩🇪
Hard to hear, put on a mic on your shirt so when you turn your back we can still hear.
This is in order for houses to become completely unaffordable and very expensive to live and maintain. So what the house keeps warm air inside the house better than before, it is negated by the fact that ventilation has constantly to throw away warm air and expensively heat cold air by electricity that’s going to blow into the house to replace it. Good old house was no brainier - much cheaper to build, much cheaper to maintain. In fact, those modern houses don’t even keep warm air better because although insulation is very thick, people install huge panoramic windows around the house and the idea of insane insulation becomes completely negated.
Tongo, I see the concerns for the extra cost. I feel that deeply as well.
I also know that the choices we make about the quality of construction materials - are the choices people get "stuck with" for the life of that building. Growing up, the cost of utilities mattered to my mom, as she tried to provide for our family. Looking to the future, those costs will continue to rise, and I believe that hard working folks will appreciate living in homes with better insulation and lower utilities.
For hard working folks these new A++ houses hasn’t become lower utilities houses as it was promised when industry lobbyists pushed their agenda into parliaments. The utilities have become higher.
Das ist ein Fehler. Wärmerückgewinnungsgeräte haben einen Wirkungsgrad von 95%. Und passivhäuser sind nicht teurer im Unterhalt. Ja teurer bei der Anschaffung 25-35% mehr. Dafür spart man Heizkosten. Öl 1.20€/l gas 1.40€/m3. From 50€ Cent kwh
You talk to much and to complicate!! Come to the point in 10 wards...What is the difference between net zero and passive house?
I just recorded the condensed version... thanks for the inspiration. :)
th-cam.com/video/RZ36LlZIRWI/w-d-xo.html