has control4 been recognized as complying with title 24 (california)?

[dschag]

have searched this forum for awhile and have not found anything on whether control4 satisfies caleefornia's title 24 requirements, such as, blocking outside lights being on during day. I know you can program hours for lights but does the title 24 committee accept control4 as a valid option? There are, of course, a spate of issues in title 24 but it begins with whether the title 24 group has caught up with modern technology. Thanks for any advice. Dan

[dschag]

Got no response from the forum on this question, but for those who interested, I got this response from a title 24 representative (via email):

Title 24 does not recognize any products. Title 24 requires that lighting controls to be installed, and many of those lighting controls must be certified by the manufacturer to the Energy Commission. Certification is a declaration made by the manufacturer, under penalty of perjury to the laws of California, that the device meets all of the required regulations. This certification is not an endorsement by the Energy Commission. I recommend that you read Section 5.2.1.2 of the lighting chapter in the Nonresidential Compliance Manual. Following is a link to that chapter:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-400-2008-017/rev1_chapters/NRCM_Chapter_5_Indoor_Lighting.pdf

It would be up to the manufacturer to declare if a lighting control meets the requirements. That is not something I can do.

Regards,

Gary Flamm

Supervisor, Building Standards Development Unit

California Energy Commission

1516 Ninth Street, Mail Stop 37

Sacramento, CA 95814

916-654-2817 Phone

gflamm@energy.state.ca.us

[CFUG]

Title 24 is pain in the ass and getting worse as local municipalities try to take it one step further.

[mercedes]

I am building a new corporate headquarters building here in Nebraska. We too have rules around energy conservation which include motion detection and automatic lights out after a period of time. We are installing Control4 to handle all of the A/V requirements along with security panel integration and lighting control. We were told by the local code enforcement that Control4 would NOT be compliant per their requirements. I was planning on putting a switch and a motion detector in each room with programming to control the on/off. Since I am doing lighting control anyway I figured I would just use Control4 and add a motion detector to each room. Some of them would have motion detection anyway because of the security system. We were told that since the system included "programming" that could not be regulated that it would not meet the requirements. The lighting control must be hard wired.

Thank you government and bureaucrats for once again telling me what to do and looking out for "my" best interest. I am all for saving energy and going green. We are doing Geo Thermal even though it has a 15 year payback, and installing lighting control but shouldn't it be my choice on how I deploy that?

Hope this helps a little.

[dschag]

mercedes, your response does help due to striking a sympathetic cord with my increasing frustration (instead of little happy/sad icons, wish i could show a 'furious face').

i have now talked to several people in different segments and it is clear that control4 will not be recognized as complying with title 24 in california. among other things, the fact that a person can change the parameters after inspection is a commonly cited reason control4 will not be accepted. it is just not good psychological motivation to frustrate people (when there are so many ways to game the system) instead of trying to motivate people to find a better way to accomplish energy conservation.

wish these morons weren't morons.

[xc420]

^ only those who choose to grease the palms of the bureaucrats will get compliance. After that your building should be ready for Cap and Tax to kick in.

[mercedes]

In three of the bids that have been returned from the general contractors, two of them have a line item expense that is optional that will "undo" a number of the governmental requirements placed on electrical and HVAC. I find that amusing and frustrating at the same time. So we can program the C4 system to do something else, which would most likely be better than just circumventing the controls altogether. How outright stupid.

[tigrzeye]

Sorta like the local race track that put in a whole field of solar panels to go green. Wow they got great press. Of course there are the 100,000 plus fans that show up for the NASCAR race, 1 of 3 races for the weekend, in their gas burning vehicles, that they drove for 5 - 10 hours to get there. Each team has a hauler and the drivers all have motor homes. And then there are the airplanes and helicopters they fly in and out with to make sponsorship or family commitments easier. And then there are the emergency and track crew vehicles, and not the least to mention the 43 NASCAR cars that get 3 -5 mpg and have absolutely no emission controls.

BUT they have those wonderful solar panels, so they are GOING GREEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D:D

[dschag]

hey, hey, hey mr. Royal Security Services, Inc. i gather you are not a gear head. i too have a race car (miata) and let's at least make the argument relevant: given that we use energy, should we look for new technology to make better use of the energy we are determined to use or should we let some idiot (i mean bureaucrat) make us do something less efficiently, the old fashioned way (probably because that industry is represented by a lobbyist)? NASCAR, SCCA, Formula One, all look for ways to improve mpg. if the government had said, all corvettes are limited to one four-barrel carburetor, then you would not have the new awesome mega hp vetts that get 20 mpg.

[ILoveC4]

i too have a race car (miata)

Sorry...race car and miata in the same sentence made me chuckle. You'd have to do a lot of work to a Miata to make it much of a "race car"...at least my definition of race car.

[CFUG]

I'm looking out the window of my office right now and here are two Miatas fully race-prepped sitting under a carport. Stickers and a trailer full of tires behind each one

[ILoveC4]

^So those would fall under the "You'd have to do a lot of work to a Miata" caveat that I typed.

=)

[CFUG]

Yeah, I suppose but I think those out there have turbos. I see a no stock tailpipe so probably something going on there too. I really think these owners have not spent too much because they always kid me about my car and the gobs of money plowed into it. Miatas are a nuisance for me over at Streets of Willow so I'm a prime target for jokes even at 500hp...

[tigrzeye]

Nope big time gear head!! And definitely a big NASCAR fan. Just a comment about something that seems like an oxymoron to me.

[dschag]

ok, looks like i did a great job of derailing conversation--last comment (from me). on technical tracks, i've seen miatas beat vetts (driver with skills, certainly not me). they say miatas teach you how to drive a race car because you can't depend on hp to compensate. oh, and by the way, driving with momentum actually produces better gas mileage. hope to hell aaron, my control4 installer, knows how to be economical.

[CFUG]

The only other car that might possibly handle as well as a Miata could be the FDRX7. There you have some power on the straights. But, good luck keeping the engine alive. There's where the BP powerplant comes in.