Hi Javier,

I would arrive at the same conclusion based on a strict reading of 90.1.

I can't speak directly for USGBC or its reviewership, but I would expect a rational/logical individual who is permitted to review models in a rational/logical fashion to at least consider accepting an alternate, non-electric baseline system *if* you can make a strong case for why a specific non-electric baseline would make for a fundamentally *better* system upon which to found a performance rating. Perhaps circumstances specific to the region of Chile you're working in mean an equivalent electric heating source would be infeasible? I don't personally believe 90.1 & LEED are at their core trying to make it inordinately easy *or* difficult for any specific region or circumstance, but rather trying to make the procedure as evenhanded as possible.

Before taking any action (other than pursuing an "electric or other" baseline system), I would first suggest determining whether you can make such a case. If so, take the actions necessary to pose your situation/query in a written fashion to the correct parties through the proper LEED channels - It's been said your LEED project administrator may have an email for directing project-specific questions to the appropriate parties outside of a formal CIR.

NICK CATON, P.E.