• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

The Erosion of Freedom Through Green Laws

Dick

Your website is touting how much energy savings people can get if they install your windows, but here you whine and tilt at energy windmills. Green is ok as long as it is lining your pocked. That is a very quixotic outlook on life. You are a very knowledgeable guy and we agree on many things, But tone it down a bit And Think about what you are saying. Your posts are counterintuitive.

conarb said:
http://www.superwindows.info/Energy Efficiency

Triple-pane SuperWindows reduce energy consumption in a typical home by as much as 70%. Even the best dual-pane windows rarely reach even 30% savings.

PG&E report, indicates just how much more energy efficient Superwindows are than regular windows. (Click on the graphic to see PG&E's report.)
How much more do you make off the "Triple-pane SuperWindows" than single or double pane windows?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The line of demarcation is, was and always will be when personal freedom interferes with the greater good.
Who determines the "greater good"?

You? Obama?

The Bill of Rights is about "individual" rights, not the greater, or "collective", good.

It's about sovereign, inalienable, individual rights (i.e. "life, lilberty, and the pursuit of happiness").

Dick, perhaps you (and other California business owners) should explore suing the federal government for inverse condemnation via regulatory taking.
 
packsaddle said:
pursuit of happiness
Not actual happiness

packsaddle said:
Who determines the "greater good"?
Obviously not you, If you knew, you wouldn’t need to ask.

packsaddle said:
Dick, perhaps you (and other California business owners) should explore suing the federal government for inverse condemnation via regulatory taking.
Why in the world would Dick try to sue, He made his money from selling "green" energy efficient Triple-pane SuperWindows
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When you see a post that you disagree with; you are welcome to debate it; however, when you start attacking the person instead of addressing subject, you are degrading, not only the person; but, this forum.

Thanks,

Uncle Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I noticed you did not chid Conarb, when he and pack went after me in other threads
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mark Handler,

"Packman must comply with his state laws as set forth by SECO, the Texas State Energy Conservation Office."

I deleted that part of my post within a few minutes of posting (not fast enough); so the debate would not be changed ; however, the "Texas State Energy Conservation Office";

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=34&pt=1&ch=19&rl=1

is not a State Agency; and has no enforcement authority that is relevent to Packsaddle's work.

Uncle Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you for clarifying that

And the chiding could have been nipped in the bud, have some of the parties responed to private mail requests

By the way UB, you private mailbox is full too
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Full Mailbox,

Sorry about that; I'm a packrat; but, have deleted a few.

My e-mail address is at the bottom of all my posts.

Uncle Bob
 
If someone wants to build a green home, then let them do it; but don't force anyone to build something they are paying for that they don't want. That is the line of demarcation: power versus force. I have the power, in the form of my available dollars, to build the house I want; but if you force me to build something I don't want, then you have crossed the line and you have invaded my rights to the pursuit of happiness, and my freedom of choice.

As for the business owners who run the AC and open the doors too, they are stressing an already over-stressed utility. If they want to turn off the AC, then let them open the doors, otherwise their stupidity should cost them, in the form of fines; or they can generate their own power to waste as they wish. Can't have it both ways. IMHO.
 
I have to agree with JBI. With the brown and black outs in areas do to the load placed on the electrical system by the cooling demand, making people keep the door closed is for the greater good. What they were doing had the potential to be the straw that broke the back of the electrical system and put nursing homes and hospitals in the dark.

Also I am not a fan of SFR sprinklers, but if your jusrisdiction has the law, as a code official you have to enforce it. I don't agree that a BO who issued permits without SFR sprinklers when they are required by law can be considered the equal of Rosa Parks and Harriet Tubman. That's kinda like me saying my 12 year old son is on the same level playing baseball as Willie Mays. But I also don't think that requiring SFR sprinklers could be considered the same as the what the Nazi's did in WWII either.

Now if Pack issues the permit contrary to the law as an act of civil disobediance and is willing to suffer the penalty for that disobediance thats another thing. That is what civil disobediance is about. Doing something to bring attention to a wrong in order to get it changed. What I call a wrong is gonna be different than what you call a wrong.
 
"...force me to build something I don't want, then you have crossed the line and you have invaded my rights to the pursuit of happiness, and my freedom of choice...."

Ewenme manages a less shrill, less alarmist way to make pack's protest, albeit just as flawed.

I like to drive my car at 100 MPH with no seat belt, I like to take a baseball bat and beat people who look different from me with it, I can't tolerate the beeping of a smoke alarm. Timothy McVeigh told the patrolman that stopped him on the highway that he didn't need no stinkin' driver's license.

You don't have to be a member of society at all, but you may end up enjoying your solitary thoughts behind bars.
 
The Erosion of Freedom Through Green Laws

IGCC Section 1007.3 Sale of existing buildings and tenant spaces. Buildings and tenant space that are sold shall comply with Sections 1003.2 and 1003.3 within 1 year of sale.

So I have the freedom to sell my office building "as is" but the buyer does not have the freedom to use it "as is" for an office building for more than 1 year.
 
"The erosion of freedom Through Green Laws"

I don't believe that the Federal Green Laws are designed to save energy "throughout" the country. If they were; they would include requiring existing buildings to comply; just as the ADA requirements did; and, provide a timeline to bring all existing buildings up to snuff.

The small percentage of buildings (especially homes) in the U. S., effected by the Green laws and codes will not provide any significant energy savings over the next 100 years.

If the "powers that be" were really conserned with energy conservation; they would require businesses to lower their ceilings (conditioned building envelope); and limit residential ceiling heights to eight feet; pass and enforce laws that restrict the use of commercial lighting for advertising and entertainment (Las Vegas for example).

The new "Smart Meters" being required on residential homes are not extended to "the bright lights of Vegas", or commercial lighting for advertising and entertainment of business' in New York, Los Angeles, and the Fort Worth/Dallas metroplex. Turn off those lights at dusk; and the energy crisis will come to an abrupt end.

The Green Laws and Codes are aimed directly at the middle class; that is people who have earned enough money to buy/build "a new home". People who are rich; like Al Gore; will always be able to afford high utility costs regardless of the increase.

It's about the elimination of the middle class in our society.

Uncle Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When green building goes away what will replace it as the latest fad to be incorporated into the codes and forced upon the unwilling?

"...one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all." Where is the liberty and the justice in forcing people to do things they would rather not do. I'd rather have an outhouse than an indoor toilet because of many factors, but I manage quite well in society. I'd rather not have neighbors' house walls within six feet of my walls, and yet, I manage quite well in society.

For the government to take away my right to decide what I need is an abrogation of my rights and a usurpation of my liberty. I'm waiting for the second coming of Common Sense. It appears that Comomon Sense was killed sometime between 1776 and 2010.
 
mark handler said:
Where exactly is the line of demarcation between green laws and personal freedom? Pack, You are the thread starter, entitled "Erosion of Freedom Through Green Laws".

You are the one that needs that, "line of demarcation".
Wouldn't that line be difference for all of us?
 
Nobody seems to want to answer my question.

Why?

How far will you go to enforce green laws?

Will you fine somebody for leaving their porch light on?

Will you pay a fine for leaving your porch light on?

Will you fine a homeowner because he/she still has an incandescent light in their home in 2012?

Will you pay a fine for having an incandescent light in your home?

Do you agree that it is wrong for the government to tell you what kind of lightbulb you can have in your home?

At what point does green laws infringe on your personal freedoms?

These are the kind of questions you need to begin asking yourselves if you plan to remain in the code enforcement industry.
 
So much heat, so little light.

Moderators are mighty tolerant to allow so much political going in...or is it philosophical?

Here's what I think I found unsettling about ewenme's reply:

"... I have the power, in the form of my available dollars..."

The statement appears to say that money equals power. Is that the same as one dollar=onevote?

The Supreme Court's recent ruling re campaign finance has virtually given the election process over to those with the "power" to blanket the media thickly enough to soak their POV through the thickest moss on sleeping brains.
 
Packsaddle,

As a Building Inspector; I will enforce all codes adopted by the AHJ and/or per the Building Official's guidance; including the Energy Codes; and, including all that you mentioned. When I can't do that; I will quit; but, I still believe that (for the time being) I can do more good within the system. I didn't like Code Enforcement (weeds, grass, junk vehicles, etc.) so I allowed my State Accredidation to expire.

I don't like the idea of having to wear seat belts; because I believe they are dangerous; but, I wear them.

As far as my personal rights are conserned; they have already been taken away; and, I'm too poor and too old to give a tinker's ****. My time to fight the good fight is pretty much over; other than giving lip service to my opinions.

You have to enforce codes that you disagree with don't you?

Uncle Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jim,

"Moderators are mighty tolerant to allow so much political going in...or is it philosophical?"

From the looks of the rest of the forum; this is about "the only game in town".

I wish we had a chat room. We could take subjects like this there and have some real philisophical discussions.

However, I believe that with Green being so new; and just in it's infancy we should kick it around the yard; and see where it lands.

When we can no longer express our opinion about pending code requirements; then we will surely be in a lot of trouble.

This is a Sunday School meeting; compared to the Mini-soda sprinkler threads on the old BB.

Uncle Bob



 
Where were the Naysayers and critics of the energy codes in the seventies when insulation was required in walls, roofs and in floors; Where were the Naysayers and critics when minimum U values were imposed; Where were the Naysayers and critics when minimum seers are required for FAUs.

Basically nonexistent.

Now the Naysayers and critics are coming unglued over the following:

Siting of the building

Energy Efficiency- Passive design strategies dramatically affecting building energy performance

Materials Efficiency- Reuse and recycle

Totally amazing

Constructive criticism is a good thing but blaming it on some of the reasons in previous posts, ridicules, the world is no longer flat.
 
packsaddle said:
Nobody seems to want to answer my question.Why?

How far will you go to enforce green laws?

Will you fine somebody for leaving their porch light on?

Will you pay a fine for leaving your porch light on?

Will you fine a homeowner because he/she still has an incandescent light in their home in 2012?

Will you pay a fine for having an incandescent light in your home?

Do you agree that it is wrong for the government to tell you what kind of lightbulb you can have in your home?

At what point does green laws infringe on your personal freedoms?

These are the kind of questions you need to begin asking yourselves if you plan to remain in the code enforcement industry.
Packsaddle,

I would like to answer your questions.

But I need to know where I can go to educate myself on the new code from where you collected the above questions.
 
Uncle Bob said:
"The erosion of freedom Through Green Laws"I don't believe that the Federal Green Laws are designed to save energy "throughout" the country. If they were; they would include requiring existing buildings to comply; just as the ADA requirements did; and, provide a timeline to bring all existing buildings up to snuff.

The small percentage of buildings (especially homes) in the U. S., effected by the Green laws and codes will not provide any significant energy savings over the next 100 years.

If the "powers that be" were really conserned with energy conservation; they would require businesses to lower their ceilings (conditioned building envelope); and limit residential ceiling heights to eight feet; pass and enforce laws that restrict the use of commercial lighting for advertising and entertainment (Las Vegas for example).

The new "Smart Meters" being required on residential homes are not extended to "the bright lights of Vegas", or commercial lighting for advertising and entertainment of business' in New York, Los Angeles, and the Fort Worth/Dallas metroplex. Turn off those lights at dusk; and the energy crisis will come to an abrupt end.

The Green Laws and Codes are aimed directly at the middle class; that is people who have earned enough money to buy/build "a new home". People who are rich; like Al Gore; will always be able to afford high utility costs regardless of the increase.

It's about the elimination of the middle class in our society.

Uncle Bob
One helluva post UB...you split the arrow!
 
Mr Baird:

Ask any person of little means, and they will tell you that, indeed, money is power: the power to take care of oneself, the power to buy food, clothing and shelter [and, gasp, entertainment]. Ask any person of grand wealth and they will tell you that money is power: the power to buy what you want; the power to control estates and businesses; the power to vacation anywhere you want, etc. Money is a tool, and like any good tool, it has the power to work for you if you have some it, but it takes away your power when it's gone.

votes and money should not be used in the same sentence: as in one vote equals one dollar. Votes should not be bought or sold at any price. However, I think big-money has overcome the power of the vote. Why else would over 75% of the voters avoid the polls? [That statistic comes from the local figures; less than 25% of the eligible voters participated in the primary held in our county.] If one person one vote held sway all the way to the deciding elections in November, not the electoral college, then voter turn out would mean something more than it currently does. But I digress.

One person one vote. Money is power. People are wont to make their own choices. When you wrap them all into one sandwich and take a bite, you have tasted freedom. If you don't like the taste, then join in to make the rules to your liking, just like you neighbor has the right to do. Who is 'them' 'they' and all those being blamed for the problems? It is us. Like Pogo said, 'We have met the enemy and he is us.'

Complaining does not solve any problems. Pick a direction and start walking, doing, and eventually you'll get there. If no one comes along, oh well. Lead, follow, but get out of the way. And, yes, cliches have their roots in truth.
 
I think UB is on to something and would like hear more.

Example cell towers:

Oh, by the way; those cell towers that you see when you travel around the country, are not just cell towers. I'd tell you what they are really for, but you wouldn't believe me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top