Policy Update: The Massachusetts Stretch

isaac pic

Isaac Elnecave, a member of the PHIUS certification team, has written this update on the Massachusetts stretch cove, the latest installment of his policy updates.

Over the last 8 years, Massachusetts has made significant progress towards making the passive house (PHIUS+) standard an integral part of its building energy code. This effort points the way to the end goal of creating a cost-effective net-zero energy code.

Besides its statewide base energy code, which is an amended version of the latest International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) model code, the Board of Building Regulations and Standards (BBRS) in Massachusetts has, since 2009, promulgated a “stretch” energy code. The base energy code governs the minimum energy saving requirements in buildings throughout the state. The requirements include: the amount of insulation required in ceilings, walls and foundations; window performance; the level of air tightness; ventilation requirements; the efficacy of lighting and the efficiency of HVAC equipment. It is often described as the worst possible building (from an energy perspective) that can legally be built.

A stretch energy code incorporates similar measures and design approaches but mandates energy efficiency requirements that result in higher performance buildings than those meeting the base energy code. While the base energy code is the default requirement across all towns and cities in the Commonwealth, the stretch energy code must be affirmatively adopted by local municipalities that want to enforce it (at which point, it supplements and overrides the base energy code in that jurisdiction). Importantly, unlike New York State, because the BBRS approves the stretch code, municipalities that adopt it cannot amend it.

In both the Base and Stretch codes in Massachusetts, there is a section for alternative compliance strategies, which specifically includes passive house in both the low-rise residential energy code chapter and the commercial energy code chapter. Under the requirements of its current edition, and in fact since 2012, in any jurisdiction that adopts the stretch code in Massachusetts, a PHIUS+ certified passive house automatically meets code. The current code amendments specify that the annual heating demand for PHIUS certified home or commercial building must be less than 10 kbtu/ft2/year; a value easily met by all certified PHIUS buildings.

The latest edition of the Massachusetts stretch code has just been adopted but has not yet been promulgated* — the expected promulgation date is February 8, 2020 with an effective date of Aug 8, 2020. There will be two significant changes. First, PHIUS itself has updated its standard to PHIUS + 2018 from PHIUS + 2015. Second, with this new edition, a residential or commercial building will be code compliant when it passes the pre-certification stage (much like saying a typical house is given code approval once the plans have been approved.) The updated energy code, based on the IECC 2018, shifts the passive house compliance option from the 10 kBtu/ft2/year metric to an option to seek PHIUS precertification prior to pulling a permit. A project must demonstrate that it has been submitted for final certification by PHIUS to receive the certificate of occupancy. Because PHIUS maintains a rigorous review process through the end of construction, this approach ensures a high quality of construction.

Passive house certification requirements are significantly more stringent than even the other alternative paths in the stretch code (the most commonly used path in the Massachusetts residential stretch code allows for an Energy Rating Index score of 55, which is well above the score typically achieved by a certified passive house).

Massachusetts provides an excellent example of how to use incentives to spur the development of high-performance buildings. Mass Save®, the statewide energy efficiency program in Massachusetts, launched a mid- to high-rise passive house incentive program in the summer of 2019. In the first 6 months over 40 projects with over 3,000 passive house units in development have signed up for the program.  As more projects are built meeting PHIUS standards either through the stretch code or through Mass Save, the universe of designers and builders who become proficient in the construction of high-performance builders grows. This proficiency will result in greater confidence among construction professionals and lower costs with respect to high performance buildings.

As the PHIUS standard includes a pathway to net-zero construction, including it in the stretch and base energy code provides a path for future improvements. In Massachusetts, stretch code development will now focus on a ‘net-zero’ code to run alongside an amended IECC 2021 base code. Having the passive house pathway in the energy codes has introduced designers and builders to the tools and techniques necessary for building cost-effective net-zero single-family and multi-family dwelling. PHIUS looks forward to working with Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources, BBRS and other key stakeholders in making a net-zero code a reality.

Massachusetts in one of three states and one municipality that have incorporated the PHIUS standard in the energy code. New York was discussed in a previous blog (Policy Update: New York State, Two Steps Forward, One Step Back, January 16, 2020). I’ll discuss efforts in Washington State and the city of Denver in a future post.

* Adoption means voting and signing by government official. Promulgation (it specifically means the decree that puts a law into effect), in practice, refers to when the agency in charge of enforcing the law signs off on the rules and regulations relating to the law.

 

Policy Update: New York State—Two Steps forward, One Step back

isaac picIsaac Elnecave, a member of the PHIUS certification team, has written this update on the New York State stretch cove.

Over the last year, the state of New York has made significant progress towards making the PHIUS+ standard an integral part of its energy code. It points the way to the end goal of creating a cost-effective net-zero energy code.

Besides its statewide base code, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) promulgates a “stretch” energy code (NYStretch-2020). The base energy code governs the energy requirements in buildings throughout the state. The requirements include such items as: the amount of insulation required in ceilings, walls and foundations, window performance, the level of air tightness, ventilation requirements, the efficacy of lighting and the efficiency of HVAC equipment. It is often described as the worst possible home that can legally be built.

A stretch energy code incorporates energy efficiency requirements that are more stringent than the base code (NYStretch-2020 is roughly 11% more energy efficient than the base code). While the base energy code is the default requirement across jurisdictions in the state, the stretch energy code must be affirmatively adopted by local municipalities (authorities having jurisdiction) that want to enforce it—at which point, it overrides the state code in that jurisdiction).

Besides providing energy savings beyond the base energy code, NYStretch-2020 was developed with the following goals in mind:

• Technically sound
• Thoroughly reviewed by stakeholders
• Written in code enforceable language
• Fully consistent with the 2018 IECC, ASHRAE 90.1-2016, and uniform codes

Moreover, NYSERDA strongly encourages, but does not require, that a jurisdiction adopting the NYStretch-2020 do so without making amendments.

In NYStretch-2020, there is a section for alternative compliance strategies (R-408), which specifically names passive house; a single-family home or low-rise multi-family certified under PHIUS+ would automatically meet code. The stretch code specifies that the specific space heat demand and (sensible only) cooling demand, as modeled and field-verified by a CPHC (Certified Passive House Consultant), must be less than or equal to 9 kBTU/ft2/year. A dwelling unit shall also be tested with a blower door and found to exhibit no more than 0.05 CFM50/ft² or 0.08 CFM75/ft² of air leakage. Ultimately, to provide a Certificate of Occupancy, a code official must submit a form that must indicate that the finished building achieves a CPHC verified specific space heat demand of less than or equal to 9 kBTU/ft2/year.

It is important to note that the PHIUS standard is even more energy efficient than the requirements in NYStretch-2020. Here is a link to NYStretch-2020: file:///C:/Users/phius/Downloads/NYStretch-Energy-Code-2020%20(7).pdf.

New York City
New York City provides an example of the importance of the stretch energy code. Local law 32 requires the city council to adopt the New York State Stretch code (allowing the inclusion of amendments). The language of the law is fairly clear:

Submit to the city council proposed amendments to this code to bring this code up to date with the most recent model stretch code published by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, provided that such model stretch code is more stringent than the New York State Energy Code in effect when such proposed amendments are submitted and provided further that such model stretch code was first published no more than three years before such proposed amendments are submitted;

As noted in the previous section, NYStretch-2020 is significantly more energy efficient than the base state code. Consequently, the city council is about to adopt NYStretch-2020 with one very important and unfortunate exception. R408, the section of NYStretch-2020 which allows for an alternate compliance path using PHIUS+, has been deleted. Here is a link to the proposed energy code  (Click on Int. No. 816 for the text of the code).

It is unclear as to why section R408 was deleted but it removes an important alternate compliance option for designers and builders. PHIUS+ incorporates both rigorous design standards with robust quality control protocols to ensure that the building is both energy efficient and well-constructed.

As the PHIUS standard is more energy efficient than the provisions of the NYStretch-2020, it also provides a target for future code improvements while giving designers and builders the time to develop expertise in building energy efficient dwellings; ultimately leading to the establishment of a net-zero energy code.

PHIUS Travels to Shanghai to Keynote Passive House Alliance China’s 3rd Passive Building Summit

Katrin Klingenberg, PHIUS Executive Director

Developing Partnerships and Fostering Collaboration to Bring Climate-Specific Passive Building Standards to China

china-ph-conference-intro

The 3rd China Passive Building Summit took place in Shanghai Oct. 27-28, 2016.

This year I was invited to give the keynote address at Passive House Alliance China’s 3rd China Passive Building Summit in Shanghai, with the explicit request to report on passive building progress in the US and on PHIUS’ climate-specific standards.

In light of the immense amount of development currently taking place in China, with whole cities springing up practically overnight and a huge stock of existing buildings in need of energy efficiency upgrades, China’s interest in the passive building work being done in the US is significant.

It is expected that by 2030, a large amount of buildings will be newly constructed or retrofitted worldwide that will be equivalent to about 60% of the building stock that currently exists today worldwide. Thus it is crucial that these buildings, whether they be new construction or retrofits, perform at very high levels, ideally at zero energy or zero carbon performance thresholds, in order to tackle the challenges of global climate change. A large portion of this new construction activity will occur in China and India.

As I arrived in Shanghai a few weeks ago, my first impression on the way into downtown was “Wow, this is a really big place.” In fact, it is the largest “city proper” in the world. Shanghai consists of a conglomeration of countless high-rise residential subdivisions that emerge soon after leaving the airport and continue to expand along the hour-long ride into downtown. The implications of building on this scale came into focus again later that evening as I was at the hotel battling the jetlag of an 11-hour time difference following a 14-hour flight, when I heard the breaking news: the UN had just announced that 2016 is the first year on record that CO2 levels in the atmosphere not only hit 400 ppm, but that those levels have been sustained on average throughout the entire year. Needless to say, this is a threshold with serious consequences that will take a long time to reverse, and as you know, much of that CO2 comes from operating buildings.

climate-spec-usa-china

A recent study prepared by the Global Building Performance Network (GBPN) in Paris investigated passive buildings worldwide as a necessary solution to the climate challenge. For more information about the GBPN studies, you may view the reports at http://www.gbpn.org/reports

China is a big country, approximately the geographic size of the US, and has a significant diversity of climates, many of them very similar to the US. As such, and with well over 4 times the population of the US, the country’s building community shows great interest in PHIUS’ climate-specific passive building standards. A recent study prepared by the Global Building Performance Network (GBPN) in Paris investigated low-load high-performance buildings (ie. passive buildings) worldwide as a necessary solution to the climate challenge. For this study the GBPN developed a low-load space conditioning needs map (see image at right) which shows that the low-load systems profile (different combinations of heating, cooling and dehumidification requirements depending on climate) of the US looks almost identical to China. With such close similarities between the climates of the US and China, the implementation of our methodology for developing climate-specific passive building standards in China is a logical next step.

The 3rd Passive Building Summit was well organized and well attended, bringing in about 500 participants and a host of great presentations during the opening plenary followed by excellent technical sessions. On the day following my keynote, I participated in a technical workshop to assess how to facilitate continued collaboration between PHIUS and the Passive House Alliance China group going forward. We agreed that the applicability of the climate-specific passive building standards adapted from the US to the Chinese context is a no-brainer, however more work will still need to be done, such as developing metrics to incorporate local cost data for the best cost-optimized results.

We concluded the workshop with the Chinese passive building group in agreement to pursue further collaboration going forward and that PHIUS’ role in that collaboration would be to help generate Chinese climate-specific passive building standards using the same methodology used for the DOE/NREL report. In this arrangement, our Chinese partners would provide all the necessary information and parameters needed to run the calculations. As a first step on this front we have already generated the climate data set for Guangzhou for the first project enrolled for PHIUS+ 2015 certification.

Please stay tuned for more information on further developments with this promising new partnership as we look forward to tackling the challenges of climate change together.

 

– Katrin

10th Annual NAPHC – best party of the year, maybe ever…

Wow – was that a successful conference! It has been a week and I am still processing it all. Chicago was unlike any other conference — things did not slow down in the office after it was all over, they rather accelerated. It indeed appears we have reached a tipping point.

From more than one person I heard that it seemed that the quality of work, detailing expertise and technical knowledge, size of projects and complexity of building types had reached a new high. And, compared to the early years, we were not just talking theory and intentions—but what people had done! Really impressive.

LEFT: Dr. Hartwig Künzel giving the Day 2 Keynote -- RIGHT: Sebastian Moreno-Vacca participating in the Architects' Hootenanny (L-R: T.McDonlad, T.Smith, J.Moskovitz, Sebastian, ?)

LEFT: Dr. Hartwig Künzel giving the Day 2 Keynote — RIGHT: Sebastian Moreno-Vacca participating in the Architects’ Hootenanny including (l-r): T.McDonald, T.Smith, J.Moskovitz, Sebastian, C.Hawbecker)

New modeling tools such as WUFI Passive (Technical keynote Hartwig Künzel, day two) are making building science interrelationships more visible and intuitively understandable. WUFI Passive is enabling CPHCs to optimize designs using “hygrothermal mass” (ever heard of that?) to optimize humidity loads and even to inform design decisions overall (as Sebastian Moreno-Vacca illustrated in his session) to create a unique architectural language! How cool is that! Science, heat fluxes and thermal dynamics begin to shape architectural form.

Dirk Lohan, Principal, Lohan Anderson -- Welcomes conference attendees to Chicago

Dirk Lohan, Principal, Lohan Anderson — Welcomes conference attendees to Chicago

Dirk Lohan—Mies Vander Rohe’s grandson, and an extremely accomplished architect in his own right—hinted at this development during his welcoming remarks.

“I believe that we will begin to see as beautiful what also is energy-conscious,” said Lohan.

Supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

But maybe the most significant news is the explosive development in the multifamily affordable housing sector. It is seeing significant growth, interest and pilot developments going up in many places of the country. Thanks to the support from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, we were able to make this our core topic for the conference and will be able to actively provide support to the affordable development community.

The pre-conference sessions included a daylong affordable housing Hootenanny that brought together successful affordable, multifamily housing project teams together who generously shared lessons learned and experience. Four different project teams presented during an intense full day. The morning and afternoon presentations drew full rooms of affordable housing developers who soaked up the information and had terrific, incisive questions

The same teams presented again during the core conference breakouts in a more condensed form for those who were unable to attend the hootenanny. In addition, there were more presentations on even bigger size affordable projects in progress:

  • A 101 unit affordable development in New York now under construction in the Rockaways (Steve Bluestone, Bluestone Org.)
  • A planned affordable retrofit of a 24 story historical brick building in Chicago (Doug Farr, Tony Holub from Farr and Assoc.), the Lawson House.
  • 24 story residence hall under construction in NYC (Matt Herman, BuroHappold)
L-R: Steve Bluestone presenting with Lisa White, Doug Farr, Matthew Herman

L-R: Steve Bluestone presenting with Lisa White, Doug Farr, Matthew Herman

Really amazing stuff.

Katherine Swenson

Katherine Swenson, Vice President, National Design Initiatives for Enterprise Community Partners — Day 1 Opening Keynote

Of course this growth has been fueled by forward-looking programs that recognize that energy efficient homes make so much sense for affordable housing developers/owners and dwellers. Katie Swenson from the Enterprise Foundation was a breath of fresh air–dynamic, positive, and motivating opening keynote. She explained that in her and her organization’s eyes energy is a critical part in assuring not just housing for people—but healthy housing! “Health is the new green,” she said, and of course passive housing delivers here with excellent comfort, indoor air quality and the added bonus of resiliency when the power goes out. Katie announced that the Green Communities criteria had just included PHIUS+ 2015 certification as one of the highest energy point options.

Other affordable housing agencies also have made a move: the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency (PHFA) awarded bonus points in its last round of selecting projects for Low Income Housing Tax Credits. More recently the New York State Homes & Community Renewal (HCR) effort was mentioned in a release regarding energy efficiency measures from the White House. Those agencies now directly encourage passive building standards in their RFPs. Remarkable!

Sam Rashkin, U.S. D.O.E. -- Closing Plenary Keynote

Sam Rashkin, U.S. D.O.E. — Closing Plenary Keynote

On the other coast. Seattle just amended their multifamily building code to allow additional floor area ration (FAR) for projects that meet the PHIUS+ 2015 criteria. That’s a significant incentive for developers.

Things are cookin’!

The core conference, as usual, was chock full of goodness. There were examples of how the new PHIUS+ 2015 climate specific passive building standards helped to optimize costs both here in North America (presentations by Chicago’s Tom Bassett-Dilley, Dan Whitmore, and) and internationally (Günther Gantolier from Italy). There were nuts-and-bolts presentations on wall assembly solutions (Tom Bassett-Dilley again), air and water barrier best practices (Marcus and Keith). And, the Builders Hootenanny—led by Hammer & Hand’s Sam Hagerman, focused on component challenges such as sourcing airtight FDA approved doors for commercial construction.

The U.S. DOE’s Sam Rashkin closed the conference with an unexpected message: he suggested that we needed to rename a few things to facilitate behavioral change. He posited that ZERH, LEED, PHIUS and other green building programs are essentially fossil fuel use rehab centers trying to rehabilitate an addicted nation and to show how it can be done differently. He received a standing ovation.

A few more comments on pre-conference workshops – three WUFI Passive classes drew almost 80 people and they all were super happy throughout the two days! Who would have thought! Happy people energy modeling!

LEFT: Marc Rosenbaum's lecture on Renewables -- RIGHT: Joe Lstiburek on Multifamily Building Science & HVAC

LEFT: Marc Rosenbaum’s lecture on Renewables — RIGHT: Joe Lstiburek on Multifamily Building Science & HVAC

Marc Rosenbaum single-handedly won first place in registering the most people for his class to connect passive principles with renewables to get to positive energy buildings (the logical next step).

Joe Lstiburek placed a close second (sorry Joe) and did a phenomenal job in covering ventilation concerns in large multifamily buildings. Rachel Wagner showed the most awesome cold climate details that I have ever seen. Galen Staengl took folks on a spin to design multifamily and commercial mechanical systems.

And Gary Klein topped it all off by reminding us that without efficient hot water systems design in multifamily, no cigar!

Thanks to all presenters and keynotes! You made this an excellent and memorable event.

I have not even mentioned the first North American Passive Building Project Awards—the entries were just beautiful projects—check out the winners here. I must mention the overall Best Project winner of 2015, as I believe this is pivotal: Orchards at Orenco. What a beautiful project, the largest fully certified PHIUS+ project in the country to date, a game-changer, underlining affordable multifamily projects on the rise.

I’m extremely happy that the Best Projects winners for young CPHC/architects was a tie, and both winners are women! Congrats to Barbara Gehrung and Tessa Smith! Go girls, you are the next generation of leaders!

L-R: Best Overall Project: Orchards at Orenco; Best Project by CPHC under 35 (tie): Island Passive House, Tessa Smith; Best Project by CPHC under 35 (tie): ECOMod South, Barbara Gehrung

L-R: Best Overall Project: Orchards at Orenco; Best Project by CPHC under 35 (tie): Island Passive House, Tessa Smith; Best Project by CPHC under 35 (tie): ECOMod South, Barbara Gehrung

One last note on a thing: Passive building people know how to party while devouring the most challenging, inspiring energy science, details, philosophies (Jevons paradox – Zack Semke’s fascinating lunch keynote) from the field.

And the architectural boat tour on Saturday to top it all off was almost surreal. When we were all out on Lake Michigan and the fireworks went off over the magnificent skyline, I thought, “that’s how we roll :).” Plus, the docent from the Chicago Architecture Foundation was a font of information, and even long-time Chicagoans learned a lot along the way. If you weren’t there, you missed the best passive building party of the year, maybe ever. (But we’ll try to top it, promise.)

Finally, for the crew that just can’t get enough, the Passive Projects Tour on Sunday was, as always, an enormous hit. Tom Bassett-Dilley and Brandon Weiss put together an array of completed and in-progress projects that generated a buzz at every stop. Thanks to Tom and Brandon and to PHA-Chicago for all your help!

Cheers!

Kat

 

From passive house to passive buildings–what’s new and how manufacturers are stepping it up

BE15banner-LARGE

Exciting times indeed for passive building in the United States: Passive design principles that originated here and in Canada are all grown up and making a furious comeback. Policy makers, researchers and scientists, builders and designers are all embracing passive building in their everyday practice.

And as always, the growth is evident here at NESEA’s annual high-performance tour de force: NESEA BE15. A quick recap: Passive Building Place–a concentration of passive building component exhibitors, and the tour of their offerings, is in its fourth consecutive year. For those who remember, we started my first blog on the NESEA trade show focusing on passive house products in 2012. Passive building was still tiny then compared to what it has grown into now.

PHIUS and its membership organization the Passive House Alliance US (PHAUS) – the leading passive building research institute and alliance in the US – is the anchor of Passive Building Place for the fourth straight year.

NESEA never stands still. In its topic selection for conference workshops and presentations it continues to ask the tough questions and pushes the boundaries. I am talking about the passive building standard adaptation work we have been doing on Tuesday in a half day workshop. On Wednesday afternoon as part of the core conference I’ll be presenting about very exciting multifamily developments specifically. The Passive Building Place has become a mainstay and is expanding every year with new manufacturers who have recognized that passive building will be a significant driver for high performing materials and components.

Larger projects like Orenco Orchards in Eugene, Ore.,  by CPHC® Dylan Lamar and GreenHammer are coming on strong–they need more manufacturers to step up to the multifamily and commercial passive building market.

But, as multifamily and commercial projects come on strong, we see hesitation amongst manufacturers regarding new components and material needed for larger building developments. This follows the past trend with single family passive homes: the architects and CPHC®s (Certified Passive House Consultants) have taken on the design of the first larger buildings find themselves ahead of the curve.

While this might sound glamorous to some, in practice it is quite a challenge for the teams. Architects are out to make ambitious reductions in energy and carbon with large buildings, and they need appropriate high performance components. In principle, much of what’s been learned and accomplished in single family applications is transferable. Ideally, however, manufacturers will develop turnkey and warranted solution packages for multifamily and other large buildings. What about superinsulated thermal bridge free airtight curtain wall systems? Is this too much to ask for?

Here’s a good place to start: At last year’s 9th Annual North American Passive House Conference in San Francisco, five leading multifamily passive building teams came together for a presentation.  The one component they all wanted was a fire-rated door, that complies with ADA requirements of a low threshold, is airtight and has exceptional thermal performance comparable to the passive house windows that have taken the BE Passive Building Place by storm over the past few years.

To see what’s cooking this year, we are back for another tour of the trade show with you! I will have the pleasure of guiding a tour on Wednesday, March 4 beginning at 5.30 pm just before the boat tour. We’ll be visiting exhibitors who offer products and components germane to the passive building community. We will stop at selected passive building place exhibitors and Passive House Alliance sponsors inside and outside Passive Building Place. Because there are so many it’s impossible to visit all–instead we’ll focus on innovations and a more in depth conversation of 5-10 minutes discussing the manufacturers’ products.

Also different this year:  We will take the investigative role and instead of highlighting the passive building products we’ve seen in past years, we will challenge vendors with a different question: What are you doing to support larger passive building developments? Are you seeing the effects from it in your practice and what are you doing to respond, to prepare for it? Are there new offerings in the pipeline? What are designers asking for, what is missing?

Our goal is to identify the gap so that we can fill it. We like to inspire manufacturers to take the growth in passive building seriously. Please join us on this tour to hear from manufacturers what they are hearing and to ask the right and tough questions to inspire more high performing systems development for larger U.S. passive buildings.

Twenty-four exhibitors are joining us this year in the Passive Building Place or elsewhere on the floor–they include sponsors of PHAUS, firms with PHIUS certified professionals on staff, firms offering PHIUS verified windows or doors, or that are collaborating with PHIUS/PHAUS otherwise. Those partners are listed here:

475 High Performance Building Supply (Booth # 759)

Auburndale Builders (Booth # 913)

Bright Build Home (Booth # 549)

Conservation Services Group (Booth # 709)

Fraunhofer CSE (Booth # 660)

H Window/Energate (Booth # 642)

Huber Engineered Woods (Booth # 743)

Klearwall Industries LLC (Booth # 862)

Intus Windows (Booth # 624) PHAUS Green Sponsor

Marvin & Integrity Windows (Booth # 939) PHAUS Silver Sponsor

Mitsubishi Electric (Booth # 707) PHAUS Silver Sponsor

New England Homes by Preferred Building Systems (Booth # 919)

Passive House Institute US/Passive House Alliance (Booth # 753)

Pinnacle Windows Solutions (Booth # 763)

PowerWise Systems (Booth # 814)

PROSOCO Inc. (Booth # 949) PHAUS Green Sponsor

Roxul (Booth # 860)

Schock (#636)

SIGA Cover, Inc. (Booth # 620)

Steven Winter Associates (#844)

Stiebel-Eltron Inc. (Booth # 749)

Yestermorrow Design/Build School (Booth # 1036)

Zehnder America, Inc. (Booth # 864) PHAUS Friend Sponsor

Zola Windows (Booth # 755) PHAUS Friend Sponsor

 

We won’t have time to stop at all passive building component vendors, but we urge you to stop check them all out as you find time. Make sure to stop by:

Dryvit (Booth # 430)

Enovative (Booth # 945)

European Architectural Supply (Booth # 727)

Fantech (Booth # 828)

Foard Panel (Booth # 830)

Green Fiber (Booth # 717)

Led Waves (Booth # 628)

Main Green Building Supply (Booth # 622)

Retrotec (Booth # 541)

Sanden International (# 563)

Schock USA (Booth # 636)

Tremco Barrier Solutions (Booth # 719)

Viessmann Manufacturing (Booth # 565)

Yaro DSI (Booth # 638)

Thank you all for participating in this and putting your weight behind this exciting emerging construction market. Again, you are true leaders in this market transformation towards high performance building products that is so needed to achieve zero/positive energy buildings through passive design. Thanks again for joining!

And have a great BE15!