Energy Conservation: Policy Issues and End-Use Scenarios of Savings Potential. Part V. Energy Efficient Buildings: The Causes of Litigation Against Energy Conservation Building Codes

摘要

The guidelines laid out for the five subjects investigated in this series are to take a holistic view of energy conservation policies by describing the overall system in which they are implemented; provide analytical tools and sufficiently disagregated data bases that can be adapted to answer a variety of questions by the users; identify and discuss some of the important issues behind successful energy conservation policy; and develop an energy conservation policy in depth. Three specific cases reviewed are: the California nonresidential code (1976); the California residential code (1978); and the Farmers Home Administration code (1978). Although these three suits were brought by the building industry, this report also discusses considerations relevant to architects, bankers, and building inspectors. These cases are discussed from three perspectives: (1) objections to the codes explicitly stated in court, (2) industry conditions and practices behind objections stated in court, and (3) general beliefs not stated in court. This discussion focuses on suits intended to limit those building codes which the building industry sees as too strong. However, some energy conservation industries may sue to strengthen codes which they consider too weak. An example of such a case is Polarized Corporation's current suit against the Lighting section of ASHRAE 90-75 (Los Angeles Federal District Court, see Murnane, 1978). (ERA citation 04:016401)