Showing results 26 - 43 of 43
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Massachusetts
Document Number: PNNL - 21347 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Maine
Document Number: PNNL - 21764 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Louisiana
Document Number: PNNL - 21342 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Kentucky
Document Number: PNNL - 21779 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Kansas
Document Number: PNNL - 21345 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Iowa
Document Number: PNNL - 21340 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Indiana
Document Number: PNNL - 21725 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Idaho
Document Number: PNNL - 21483 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Hawaii
Document Number: PNNL - 21822 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Georgia
Document Number: PNNL - 21817 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Delaware
Document Number: PNNL - 21339 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Connecticut
Document Number: PNNL - 21719 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Colorado
Document Number: PNNL - 21478 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Arkansas
Document Number: PNNL - 21338 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Arizona
Document Number: PNNL - 21337 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Alaska
Document Number: PNNL - 21718 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of 2009 and 2012 IECC - Alabama
Document Number: PNNL - 21336 | Document Type: Analysis, Cost-effectiveness | Publication Date:These analyses evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the prescriptive path of the 2009 and 2012 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), relative to the 2006 IECC for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis covers one- and two-family dwelling units, town-homes, and low-rise multifamily residential buildings covered by the residential provisions of the 2009 and 2012 IECC.
HERS and IECC Performance Path
Document Number: PNNL-22560 | Document Type: Analysis | Publication Date:Pacific Northwest National Laboratory analyzed the relationship between the Residential Energy Services Network (RESNET) Home Energy Rating System (HERS) Index and the traditional simulation-based Performance Path used in the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). The analysis evaluates, for a single-family residence with various characteristics, the ranges of HERS Index values that would imply compliance with the 2012 IECC Performance Path. Several building characteristics considered likely to result in quantifiable differences in the outcomes of the two approaches, or otherwise believed to be of interest to code developers and policy makers, are considered in the analysis.