ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by gfretwell - 03/28/24 12:43 AM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by renosteinke - 03/14/24 08:05 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (CoolWill), 250 guests, and 13 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
ITO #166287 07/17/07 11:17 AM
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 806
N
Member
Quote
Where does all the mercury in the CFL's go when they die or break? Save the electricity, poison the earth.


At least with CFLs, the mercury is contained in a hermetically sealed lamp, from which it can theoretically be recovered/reused at end-of-life. Contrast this with the mercury emissions from coal-burning powerplants caused by incandescent lamp use. Those go right up the stack, and end up in the environment.

Until LED technology becomes cheaper, CFLs seem the best way to go for energy efficiency, as long as recycling measures are put in place to handle them.

NJwirenut #166296 07/17/07 12:59 PM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 812
Member
Quote
as long as recycling measures are put in place to handle them.


And how many people are going to bother to recycle them, when the trash can is right there in the kitchen/bathroom/garage?

Zero.

Ian A.


Is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 806
N
Member
I'm not sure how big a problem the residential user not recycling CFLs would really be. Homeowners aren't curently required to recycle conventional fluorescent tubes, which contain a lot more mercury than CFLs do. Obviously, it would be good if homeowners properly recycled them, (and perhaps money-back offers similar to those used for old printer cartridges would help encourage it), but even assuming that every household CFL goes into a landfill, the amount of mercury released would still be much LESS than would have been released by powerplants to run equivalent incandescents over the lifespan of the CFLs. Any level of recycling by the consumer would make the situation even better.

COMMERCIAL users are required by law to recycle their used fluorescent lamps, and CFLs should be no exception.

ITO #166302 07/17/07 04:03 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 161
M
Member
Here we use the IECC (International Energy Conservation Code) and I think it achieves a similar end result, but allows us flexibility in design. It isn't as stiff as LEED but allows us to use materials that are widely available. Glad the AHJ adopted IECC instead of LEED.


Mike Wescoatt
ITO #166312 07/17/07 07:41 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline OP
Member
ITO, you see, there lays one of my problems locally. Architects and Designers who have no interest in codes or standards! EE's who are only paid to do load calc's - stamp the plans - nothing more! And a Planning Dept. that often fails to spot mandatory items on plan check on a consistent or reliable basis.

As well as Customers and GC's who are unwilling or educated enough to hire an outside consultant - or realize that they should. Then I get caught in the middle to force feed them basic requirements in order to comply with just the basics that will enable me to pass inspection for the permit that I have to pull. As the local Inspector in the field is the one with the "No fly Zone" on the matter, but will often not look for the required items (As most of the items finish devices and fixtures) until "Finish". And sometimes that can be a very expensive 'three steps back' from the previous 'two forward'.

So what I and most every other EC does locally is look like the 'bad guy' right up front, as soon as the contract is signed. Throw the plans back to whom ever, 'You need more of this, or that, and if you do that you need one of these...' As most are unwilling to educate themselves - I end up doing it, and by the time you get them used to one code cycle, it is on to the next. I really can not tell you how often I get plans where Title-24 part 6 was even considered! And unless you have $500 shoes, and a flamboyant personality it is really hard to get paid for all the design work that you end up having to do for free to keep the progress on the job. (Even jobs with Lighting Designers I often have throw the plans back, and explain what they missed...)

So with this LEED's thing... It sounds like there will need to be some sort of additional third party to tell you what your recycling bin and vagaries of Building, Plumbing, HVAC and Electrical options are? What happens when your client base is unwilling to forebear this additional, expensive and seemingly unnecessary individual?


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
e57 #166318 07/17/07 09:00 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,294
Member
Quote
What happens when your client base is unwilling to forebear this additional, expensive and seemingly unnecessary individual?


They will build elsewhere.

electure #166325 07/18/07 01:33 AM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline OP
Member
Good point, but I got a kid on the way and a morgage to pay.


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
e57 #166446 07/21/07 01:26 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,723
Likes: 1
Broom Pusher and
Member
Mark,

I am glad you posted this, as I have not heard / seen anything regarding this LEED Score -vs- Contractors' Licensing.

I have seen the LEED term tossed around here and there, but nothing about licensing qualifications has been mentioned at the CSLB or the CBC sites (including the Energy Commission pages + all other Title 24's for the CCR).
Then again, I was not really looking for this stuff, so LEED qualification may be "buried" somewhere on one of the california sites.

If Non-Residential Standards in your area will be "Stricter" than the current Code Cycle for T24 Part 6, chapters 4 and 5 (2005 cycle), than you have a lot to deal with!

Indoor Lighting Compliance ("LTG-C") has changed dramatically, from the previous 2001 cycle, and now includes verification of installed devices forms to be filled out and followed before C.O. is issued.

Outdoor Lighting Compliance ("OLTG-C") is a new and separate chapter, with compliance forms and closeout forms.

What's really odd is the Residential Compliance (Lighting only).
Found this out just recently when performing some "paperwork" (plans, load calcs, etc.) regarding a 4plex Apartment my Father is doing.

There are no _Maximum_ Lighting Power figures per areas (Non-Residential has about 20 areas with watts per square foot maximums); but there are requirements for high efficacy Lighting in specific location - and allowances for use of low efficacy lighting in certain areas, if controlled via automatic devices.

I imagine the remainder of the Residential Compliance points (Envelope / Fenestration, HVAC, Plumbing) have been totally beefed up, as viewed by the previous code cycle.

A job I am finishing up (Non-Residential) has Electric Resistance Heating elements specified in the Fan Coils (Split System).
The MEP sets were approved by the City's Outsourced Plans Examiners, and the City also approved them.
Thing is, this particular City's Inspection staff is really paying attention to energy compliance, so let's see what happens when Final Inspection comes along!
Something will raise flags, when the Inspector sees 100 Amp, 3 Pole disconnects and 1" Conduits feeding the F.C.s - but who knows, maybe this will go unnoticed!

Anyhow, please keep me informed on the LEED situation, and I will search myself.

As Scott (Electure) said:

Quote

They will build elsewhere.


This is exactly what businesses will do or contemplate!

My views on this whole Energy thing run too deep (and enter the "Dale Gribble" conspiracy angle on several occasions).
Prior to the 2001 energy fiasco, the T24 part 6 compliance _DID_ work! AND resulted in a higher quality of Lighting + Cooling - along with reducing the level of natural resources demand, the output pollutants, and even the demands on the Power Generating Plants in California (not to mention the demand required from "Grid" purchased KWHs).

Now things are all screwed up, and I for one am PISSED!!!

Scott


Scott " 35 " Thompson
Just Say NO To Green Eggs And Ham!
Scott35 #166533 07/23/07 10:35 AM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 348
I
ITO Offline
Member
E57,

I am guess I am a little confused as to why your local inspector is inspecting design issues instead of code issue. If you have a sealed set of drawings approved by the local city review process then how can they expect you as the electrician to build it any differently? To some extent wouldn’t you be exposing yourself to redesign a job and to build it other than it was designed? Sure you might re-route some feeders or balance the panel better but not change fixture and equipment types or rework the load calcs. We are talking about sealed drawings here, and you are not the engineer.

Yes I know there is a note on most plans where the engineer says something to the effect that no matter what they put on the plans, you must build it to code. This however does not get the designer off the hook for a faulty design, no matter how hard they pretend it does. You are licensed to build the project to NEC and local building codes, the engineer is licensed to design the project to NEC and local Design Criteria; there is a difference.

I cant stress this strongly enough: For contracting to work as a business model, you must have in writing a clearly defined scope that you go into proposal with and later becomes part of your contract. Any design changes that are not part of your scope are considered a change in scope and are subject to a price increase.

Just my 2 cents but 50% of project management is good spin, and the better it is the less you sound like the bad guy to the owner and GC.

Last edited by ITO; 07/23/07 10:37 AM. Reason: typos

101° Rx = + /_\
ITO #166549 07/23/07 04:08 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,445
Likes: 2
Cat Servant
Member
Good points, ITO.

Has anyone encountered this LEEDS stuff already? If so, what changes / effects were there in the electrical aspect of the job?

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5