Renewable Revolution

Energy => Renewables => Topic started by: AGelbert on October 29, 2013, 09:54:06 pm

Title: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on October 29, 2013, 09:54:06 pm
Seattle's Bullitt Center
The Greenest Commercial Building In The World   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKqf0CxftEQ&feature=player_embedded
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-041.gif)The Flower metaphor and the Flower IMPERATIVES for a TRUELY GREEN BUILDING. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-103.gif)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHtgie2t5UI&feature=player_embedded

Designed to last 250 years, this TRUELY green building needed special permits.

WHY? Because building a zero carbon footprint building that generates it's own power, uses only the water that fall on it and recycles ALL OF ITS WASTE so nothing goes into the garbage or sewer VIOLATES at least 12 building construction codes in the USA!  :o

Seattle worked with a team to make this, the first of hopefully millions of buildings like it, a reality. :emthup:  :sunny:
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V7Bpd-pydY&feature=player_embedded

This video from a small drone is shaky but gives a nice outside view of the building.

Quote
A virtually self sustaining office building?

The Bullitt Center in Seattle is beyond simply being "green". All its water is supplied by rainwater collected in a 56,000 gallon cistern. They have composting toilets, a grand staircase with a view to discourage elevator use, and rooftop photovoltaics ready to break even with the energy use of the building.

The goal is to prove that carbon-neutral office space can be commercially viable...and to influence everyone from developers to banks to city government to start building along these lines.

http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/seattles-bullitt-center.html#sthash.ml95kKqU.dpuf (http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/seattles-bullitt-center.html#sthash.ml95kKqU.dpuf)
Another video (vimeo) at the link is quite informative.

(http://greentechadvocates.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Bullitt-energy-use.png)

(http://www.millerhull.com/media/nonresidential/Bullitt/Bullitt10.jpg)

(http://faculty.arch.tamu.edu/grogers/Land640Posters/Design%20Matters%20Posters%202010/Yi%20Xue2010%20mod.jpg)

(http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/world-s-greenest-office-building-makes-net-zero-look-easy/BullittCenterBenschneider300.jpg/image)

(http://images.gizmag.com/hero/bullitt-center.png)

(http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/5174d4b5b3fc4b748700011a_the-world-s-greenest-commercial-building-opens-in-seattle-today-_feature_diagram.jpg)

(http://img.timeinc.net/time/2012/graphics/bullitt_0620.jpg)

http://bullittcenter.org/ (http://bullittcenter.org/)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: Surly1 on October 30, 2013, 09:06:53 pm
This is really compelling stuff.

Problem (not really) with these posts is, if you watch the videos and follow all the links, you can easily put in a couple of hours (depending on the length of the vid.)

Makes me wonder how long it takes you to create one!
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on November 08, 2013, 04:08:22 pm
Surly,
A large percentage of my material was previously posted at the DD (Which promptly would get lost in the posting memory hole). So I have read most of it. That said, in the 18 chart post I made yesterday I did not go read the detailed report because I do trust the source.  ;D
Title: LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design)
Post by: AGelbert on November 15, 2013, 08:34:55 pm
LEED  (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) Green Building) Projects Near 60,000 Globally

11/15/2013

Clean Edge News

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has released its second installment of the LEED in Motion report series: Places and Policies. The report states that there are nearly 60,000 LEED green building projects across the globe, spanning 10.6 billion square feet.  Notably, Canada, India, China, the United Arab Emirates and Brazil lead the way for countries with the highest number of projects outside the U.S.

The first section of the report showcases in-depth statistics and graphics on LEED projects and areas of growth around the world, with a sub-section for projects in the U.S. as well as global projects. Canada leads the way in LEED projects outside the U.S. with 4,375 projects, followed by India with 1,586, China with 1,282, UAE with 816 and Brazil with 717 LEED-certified green building projects.

The second section examines domestic and international policies and partnerships that support the framework of LEED and drive global progress. 400+ localities have LEED-specific policies in place. Globally, there are nearly 100 green building councils in various stages of development, a LEED International Roundtable with members from 30 countries and newly launched Alternative Compliance Paths and Regional Priority Creditsfor LEED, which provide flexible, regionally-focused approaches to LEED credits for projects outside the U.S.

“LEED is a global phenomenon,” said Scot Horst, senior vice president of LEED, USGBC. “People spend 90% of their lives indoors; a healthy, resource-friendly and environmentally sound indoor environment contributes to the health, happiness and well-being of people and is something people from countries across the globe are finding value in.”(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185701.png)

http://www.cleanedge.com/Resources/news/LEED-Green-Building-Projects-Near-60,000-Globally
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 06, 2013, 10:36:53 pm
‘A Terrible Irony’ - Affordable Housing, Unaffordable Energy

Oakland Local/New America Media, News Feature, Eric K. Arnold,  Posted: Nov 26, 2013

Editor’s Note:  In Oakland, buildings account for 56 percent of the city’s carbon emissions that drive climate change. That’s slightly higher than the state average of 50 percent. Nationally, buildings make up slightly more than two-thirds of greenhouse gas emissions, making the sector a key area to achieve emissions reductions. In the past few years, several pilot projects have highlighted the benefits of bringing solar and energy efficiency upgrades to affordable housing, including public housing. In the second part of a two-part series, Oakland Local reporter Eric K. Arnold explores the benefits of energy efficiency and renewable energy for low-income residents, as well as the challenges to more widespread adoption.

Read Part 1

OAKLAND, Calif. –Tassafaronga Village, a mixed-use housing development in East Oakland, isn’t your average affordable housing project.

During a site visit, assistant manager Wendy Ruiz and maintenance worker Edgar Valencia proudly show off the building’s roof: Rows and rows of solar panels – 145 in all -- efficiently harness energy from the sun.

So far, the solar investment is reaping big energy cost savings. The monthly electricity costs to light common areas such as hallways for the entire housing project, Ruiz says, is about $25 for 137 affordable housing units and $12 for 20 market-rate townhouses. The panels require “very low maintenance,” Valencia adds. Although residents pay for individual utility use, the bills are very low, about $10-$15 monthly, Ruiz says.

Tassafaronga is the jewel in the crown of the city’s affordable housing -- a model for sustainable development that uses less electricity from the grid, has a lighter carbon footprint and provides benefits to residents and the wider community. While the model has proved effective—Tassafaronga has won numerous sustainability awards—state and federal budget cuts have derailed efforts to further green affordable housing stock in Oakland and other cities, leaving developers scrambling to find new funding sources.

The case for energy efficiency in affordable housing

Energy efficiency is particularly critical in affordable housing developments, says Jeremy Hays, chief strategist for state and local initiatives at Green For All, an environmental advocacy group. According to Hays, apartment buildings built before 1970 use 55 percent more energy than those built after 1990.

Oakland has some 8,800 units of affordable housing, not including the 3,300 units of public housing overseen by the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA), a city agency that administers federally-subsidized public housing programs and develops affordable housing throughout the city. Many of OHA’s properties were built decades ago, and are in need of rehabilitation.

A 2013 study by the Rocky Mountain Institute found that energy costs for federally-subsidized affordable housing are almost 40 percent higher than energy costs for private homes, and 10 times greater than government investment in energy efficiency. This leads, the study found, to “a terrible irony: affordable housing saddled with unaffordable energy bills.”

The disparity means that higher energy costs are passed down to property owners and low-income tenants.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113183729.png)
 :(

In both affordable housing and public housing units, tenants receive federal subsidies, known as Section 8 vouchers. Tenants generally contribute 30 percent of their monthly income toward rent and utilities, and pay utilities directly, receiving a utility allowance, which is supposed to be adjusted annually or when rates rise more than 10 percent.

Low-income residents spend 12 percent of their annual income on utility bills – four times the amount that the average American spends, according to Green for All.

Furthermore, affordable housing owners, including public housing agencies and non-profit real estate developers, are constrained by rising utility bills; energy consumption in the United States has steadily increased nearly every year since 1985, a trend that shows no signs of reversing.

As utility bills continue to rise, “we’ll continue to lose affordable housing,” Hays says, unless the amount spent on utilities can be reduced.

“Every time you reduce your energy bill, you build in some safety for yourself around increased cost,” he noted.

According to the U.S. Green Building Council, energy efficiency saves 30 to 40 percent of consumption at little to no additional cost—a significant number, considering that buildings account for 75 percent of U.S. electricity use and 36 percent of natural gas use.

Because it creates a win-win situation—lowering utility costs while benefitting the environment—utilizing renewable energy and energy efficiency has become a growing trend in the affordable housing field.

“Energy efficiency and green building will help the building and its systems last longer, which provides positive health benefits to residents and lasting benefits to the neighborhood in terms of blight reduction,” says Carlos Castellanos, director of Real Estate Development at the East Bay Asian Local Development Corporation (EBALDC), a non-profit affordable housing organization, which has developed more than 1,900 residential units.

Building affordable housing to a green standard

Built at a cost of $75 million dollars—a figure which includes not only building and construction costs, but environmental clean-up of neighborhood brownfields—Tassafaronga was the last large public housing development in the city to undergo what OHA’s Bridget Galka calls a “complete rehabilitation.”

Originally built in 1964, during the Johnson administration, Tassafaronga’s existing 87 units of low-rise public housing were dilapidated and run-down, exacerbated by jagged cracks and fissures that exemplified the term “concrete jungle” and created seismic safety issues to boot. On top of that, the site’s soil was highly contaminated by petroleum and pesticides. The neglected, blighted area became a haven for crime, prostitution and drug dealing.

After applying for a federal grant from the Environmental Protection Agency and creatively tweaking its financing model—leveraging Section 8 vouchers to qualify for a bank loan—OHA demolished the existing structures, with Galka serving as project manager for the revitalization effort.

In 2010, Tassafaronga opened, offering 157 mixed-income units—a combination of market-rate and affordable housing—covering 7.5 acres. The project has two major panel systems: rooftop solar (which powers common electrical systems), and solar water heaters. In addition to solar energy, Tassafaronga boasts energy-efficient windows, lighting and boiler systems. Other green measures include recycled building materials, low-flow toilets, rainwater-catchment drains, and paint that releases fewer toxic chemicals.

Tassafaraonga attained LEED Platinum status—the highest certification level possible—from the U.S. Green Building Council for Environmentally Sustainable Development. Completing the project “really bumped up [OHA’s] status as far as being super energy-efficient,” Galka said.

Sustainability as a community model


The development of Tassafaronga Village highlights how sustainability features in affordable housing can transform neighborhoods, when combined with holistic urban planning and community-oriented development.

Numerous studies have examined the impact of blight reduction on crime in neighborhoods. A 2011 study from the University of Michigan noted “Beautifying and maintaining” vacant or blighted property “can be an effective crime prevention strategy.”

In 2011, the Acta Non Verba Youth Urban Farm Project, a youth-run sustainable urban gardening project adjacent to the redeveloped property, opened on a city-owned plot in a neighborhood known for violent crime, drug dealing, and prostitution.

Today, the farm grows sunflowers, cotton, and organic vegetables. It also produces cheese and spaghetti sauce that is sold onsite. In addition to mitigating the “food desert” syndrome common in inner-city neighborhoods by providing a source of fresh produce, revenue from the farm goes into an education fund for its youth workers.

As Acta Non Verba Founder and Executive Director Kelly Carlisle noted, “on top of beautifying the community within the so-called bad part of town, we’ve also allowed elders and youth to consider what they’re eating.”

Further catalyzing East Oakland’s transformation, in 2011, a new public library opened up on 81st Avenue, just down the street from Tassafaronga Village. Rounding out the neighborhood is Acorn Woodland Elementary, an award-winning K-5 school also on 81st Ave., which opened in 2006 and houses a preventative care clinic onsite.

While the use of sustainability features in Tassafaronga Village isn’t solely responsible for the neighborhood’s transition from eyesore to community model, it’s unlikely the City of Oakland would have redeveloped the land used for the farm had the housing development not been rehabilitated and re-envisioned as the centerpiece of an uber-green urban planning project.

Budget cuts jeopardize future green projects

Despite the benefits of energy efficiency investments in affordable housing, financial hurdles hinder greater efforts on this front. Even though sustainability and green living models have been established in the affordable housing sector, Galka says, budget constraints limit what agencies like OHA can presently do.

For instance, Tassafaronga’s funding included $12 million from Oakland’s Redevelopment Agency. Yet that sum was locked in prior to the statewide elimination of Redevelopment Agencies in 2012. After redevelopment funding was cut, developments in the pipeline required a larger percentage of OHA funds than in previous years. The federal Housing and Urban Development department has also slashed its public housing budget.

The affordable housing sector has also been heavily impacted by mandatory sequestration due to federal budget cuts. As the San Jose Mercury News reported, OHA faces $11 million in cuts due to sequestration in 2013, which could result in the loss of a significant amount of Section 8 vouchers. That’s critical to projects like Tassafaronga, which leveraged federal housing subsidies to qualify for some $23 million in bank loans—nearly one-third of the project’s total budget.

“The reduction of affordable housing funds makes it challenging to pay for energy-efficient features,” Castellanos said.


In the past, federal funds have helped to defray up-front costs, he says, but “the long-term savings over operations that sustainable features yield doesn’t always communicate well to politicians who are trying to reduce budgets at all levels.”

The challenges which lie ahead for affordable housing are clear: Although increased investment in energy efficiency can lower energy costs for low-income residents, reduces power consumption, provides health benefits, and results in long-term cost savings for property owners, unless new funding sources are secured, the ability of affordable housing developers to provide future sustainability features remains in jeopardy.

This work was supported by a 2013 New America Media Energy Reporting Fellowship in collaboration with SoundVision Productions’ Burn: An Energy Journal.

http://newamericamedia.org/2013/11/budget-cuts-derail-efforts-to-green-affordable-housing.php
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 10, 2013, 11:00:24 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghhgUmGBjX8&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on January 05, 2014, 04:44:47 pm
I envy this fellow from Canada (and admire him too!)    (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)

SparkyBtheWonderDog 

My bungalow on Prince Edward Island, Canada, is heated right now with a solar air heater (Cansolair) and its a very comfortable 72-75F inside on a cold and snow covered day (19F today, although it was -20F yesterday, and it was the same temperature inside then too) 3500 miles ENE of Lancaster CA. Ditto with the solar hot water panels on the roof. Hot water for ZERO running cost as the circulator pumps have their own PV cell, and the solar warm air costs me less than $15.00 a year for the 31 Watt fan on the Cansolair.

Within a year, I'll also have solar PV panels, supplying my electricity. Its not how warm it is outside, its the SUNSHINE and it works even in midwinter way up north about 6 or 7 climate zones colder than Lancaster CA. Actually, sunshine works pretty well on those cold, crisp, bitter (and cloudless) dry winter days, with the sunshine reflecting off the snow onto solar panels.

So, if it works here, it will work ANYWHERE in North America, and likely much better than here, which is sunny the way Germany is sunny (ie, not exceptionally) Yeah, and even here my solar systems ($11K for both) are entirely paid for in house heating furnace oil not burned and electricity not used for hot water in under 5 years...  (http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg)

Agelber NOTE: The above comment was posted after this article about an intelligent, far seeing, rational Republican in Lancaster, California.  :o

Quote
Surprising to hear from a Republican? Not so much, Parris notes. “The Republican Party is in a quandary because the polling shows that the voters support environmental protection. It’s the leadership that doesn’t,” Parris said. “You’d have to be a moron to discount global warming. I don’t know anybody that doesn’t recognize it’s occurring.”
Read more at http://cleantechnica.com/2014/01/04/lancaster-home-solar-mandate-1st-us-world-leads-city-2014/#TxyPjS8dFSIq38E6.99 (http://cleantechnica.com/2014/01/04/lancaster-home-solar-mandate-1st-us-world-leads-city-2014/#TxyPjS8dFSIq38E6.99)



Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on January 11, 2014, 06:14:03 pm
BIOMIMETIC ARCHITECTURE: Green Building in Zimbabwe Modeled After Termite Mounds

by Abigail Doan

(http://gdb.voanews.com/77EFCADE-28C1-40C1-A2BF-CD65159CB48E_mw1024_n_s.jpg)

Biomimicry’s Cool Alternative: Eastgate Centre in Zimbabwe The Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, typifies the best of green architecture and ecologically sensitive adaptation. The country’s largest office and shopping complex is an architectural marvel in its use of biomimicry principles.

The mid-rise building, designed by architect Mick Pearce in conjunction with engineers at Arup Associates, has no conventional air-conditioning or heating, yet stays regulated year round with dramatically less energy consumption using design methods inspired by indigenous Zimbabwean masonry and the self-cooling mounds of African termites! (http://www.illustrationsof.com/royalty-free-termite-clipart-illustration-65144tn.jpg)

 (http://payload126.cargocollective.com/1/10/326952/4831354/termitemound01.jpg)


 (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_z1d_7zmpEG4/SiRpRXZgYbI/AAAAAAAABeA/atL0KDuOwjo/s400/The%2BEastgate%2BCentre%2Bin%2BHarare%2B1.jpg)
Termites in Zimbabwe build gigantic mounds inside of which they farm a fungus that is their primary food source. The fungus must be kept at exactly 87 degrees F, while the temperatures outside range from 35 degrees F at night to 104 degrees F during the day.

The termites achieve this remarkable feat by constantly opening and closing a series of heating and cooling vents throughout the mound over the course of the day. With a system of carefully adjusted convection currents, air is sucked in at the lower part of the mound, down into enclosures with muddy walls, and up through a channel to the peak of the termite mound. The industrious termites constantly dig new vents and plug up old ones in order to regulate the temperature. : (http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg)


(http://bioclimaticx.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/eastgate-zimbabwe-apartment-building.jpg)
The Eastgate Centre, largely made of concrete, has a ventilation system which operates in a similar way. Outside air that is drawn in is either warmed or cooled by the building mass depending on which is hotter, the building concrete or the air. It is then vented into the building’s floors and offices before exiting via chimneys at the top. The complex also consists of two buildings side by side that are separated by an open space that is covered by glass and open to the local breezes.


(http://sustainabilityworkshop.autodesk.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/core-page-inserted-images/eastgate_building_-_swl.jpg)
Air is continuously drawn from this open space by fans on the first floor. It is then pushed up vertical supply sections of ducts that are located in the central spine of each of the two buildings. The fresh air replaces stale air that rises and exits through exhaust ports in the ceilings of each floor. Ultimately it enters the exhaust section of the vertical ducts before it is flushed out of the building through chimneys.


(http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ehp.121-a18.g004.png)

The Eastgate Centre uses less than 10% of the energy of a conventional building its size.  :o   :emthup:These efficiencies translate directly to the bottom line: Eastgate’s owners have saved $3.5 million alone because of an air-conditioning system that did not have to be implemented. Outside of being eco-efficient and better for the environment, these savings also trickle down to the tenants whose rents are 20 percent lower than those of occupants in the surrounding buildings.



Who would have guessed that the replication of designs created by termites would not only provide for a sound climate control solution but also be the most cost-effective way for humans to function in an otherwise challenging context?

http://inhabitat.com/building-modelled-on-termites-eastgate-centre-in-zimbabwe/


(http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu272/Ctthacker/termites/6886.jpg)
SECRET termite thoughts upon viewing the Eastgate Mall:

It took those monkeys a while, but they finally figured out how WE do it!  But they STILL DON'T REALLY GET IT! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif)

As all of us smart termites KNOW, altruistic behavior is our SECRET. Human greedballs get heartburn when they are faced with this so our secret is still safe.  (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg) 

Those dumb shits think we build efficient nests just because we don't know any better? How stupid can they be!  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif)

Do they think we "co-evolved" with FUNGUS? Don't they understand that we don't just farm fungus, we have to avoid the kind that kills us too!

Do they think we have guards at the entrance to decapitate any termite with spores from the wrong fungus on them out at the hazardous waste site AND replace the guards who immediately commit suicide because we don't know any better? (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif)


Oh well, that Marx guy has been demonized so Homo SAP will probable make great fungus culture for us in a hundred years or so. We can wait. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-tv-003.gif)

Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 03, 2014, 12:33:20 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJbVLyst4Ok&feature=player_embedded
Amory Lovins grows bananas in the Rockies and sells electricity too (WITHOUT A FURNACE!  :o  ;D).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMTCNOlozTA&feature=player_embedded

LONG VERSION of first video for non-DOOMERS only.  ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5txQlEI7bc&feature=player_embedded

Energy efficiency 1 of 5 videos: Amory Lovins
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: Surly1 on May 04, 2014, 09:49:45 am
Here's a contrarian view, which when I read it, raised a number of questions. As someone who considers not only "green tech" but the moral implications seriously, I pass it along. A tip o' the Surly Crown of thorns to JD Wheeler, who posted it first.

"People tend to think that technologies like wind, solar, on-site water capture, and so on will empower the average person and local communities and loosen the power of centralized power structures. But what if the opposite is true? What if all these technologies hand the one percent even more power? Under our current socioeconomic system, what if these technologies allow the one percent to establish their libertarian utopia where they don’t need the rest of us and can tear up the social contract even further than they already have."

Why Green Architecture is a Sham (http://ow.ly/wsAlL)

Some of you may have heard of the green building certification system known as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, a private organization that even though it calls itself non-profit, functions as en effective cash cow for its founders. LEED is essentially greenwashing for the one percent to feel good about themselves even as they tear the fabric society apart. It’s yet another meaningless credential so that we can pretend our system is sustainable. What’s my evidence?

Well, here are my two favorite “green” projects, both LEED certified so they must be sustainable right? One is a new terminal at San Jose International airport built exclusively for the private jets of Silicon Valley executives to fly around the world (Designboom does not use caps):

(http://www.designboom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/mineta-san-jose-airport-designboom04.jpg)
Your private jet to Dubai awaits at this "green" airport extension

a new development at the mineta san josé international airport (SJC) will break ground in january, where private aviation firm signature flight support has been granted rights to build and operate a $82 million private development on 29 acres on the airport’s west side. the company will service and provide a new site for the personal aircraft of the principals at google, as well as other clients in the silicon valley such as hewlett packard. designed by gensler architects, the 270,000 square foot LEED gold-certified facility will feature an executive terminal, hangars, aircraft servicing resources and ramp space for accommodating large business jets such as the boeing’s 737 business jet and boeing B767. in addition, the airport extension will create economic stimulation to the region by opening up 150 to 200 construction jobs and offering the SJC $2.6 million in annual rent.
http://www.designboom.com/architecture/googles-82-million-corporate-jet-facility-in-san-jose-to-break-ground-12-20-2013/

Almost 200 jobs constructing a private jet facility for Google executives, eh? Someone call Tom Friedman! I guess the wealth is finally trickling down after all.

The other is the Virgin galactic spaceport for the one percent to blast off into space for a vacation (even as NASA’s budget is perennially cut):

(http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/10/dezeen_Spaceport-America-by-Foster-and-Partners-22.jpg)
Does it get more "green" than a spaceport for the one percent in the middle of the desert?

The Virgin Galactic Gateway to Space, a combined terminal and hangar facility, will support up to two WhiteKnightTwo and five SpaceShipTwo vehicles. The 120,000 square-foot building has been designed by Foster + Partners, working with URS Corporation and New Mexico architects SMPC.The Gateway will also house all astronaut preparation and celebration facilities, a mission control centre and a friends and family area...With minimal embodied carbon and few additional energy requirements, the scheme has been designed to achieve LEED Gold accreditation....Built using local materials and construction techniques, it aims to be both sustainable and sensitive to its surroundings.
http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/19/spaceport-america-by-foster-partners/

"Sensitive to it's surroundings," huh? Note that the space port is in THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT! So where is the water for this “sustainable” facility coming from? Oddly, the press release doesn't say, but now Richard Branson can tout his “environmental stewardship”

Do these projects seems like environmentally responsible green building projects designed for a world with less energy and a changing climate to you?

So now you can see what constitutes “green” building today. There has been a lot of criticism of LEED, but these two projects make that criticism better than anything I could say. Thanks to LEED,  the one percenters can purchase a fancy and expensive credential to show all the world how environmentally sustainable their pleasure domes are to ease their guilty consciences. After all, it’s not like private jets and spaceship use fuel, right? Here’s another one from the architect’s playground from the appropriately named MAD architects:

(http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/24226_4_aoyangParkPlaza4.jpg)
Yet another LEED-certified glass skyscraper in the world's most polluted country

The team explains: “Like the tall mountain cliffs and river landscapes of China, a pair of asymmetrical towers creates a dramatic skyline in front of the park. Ridges and valleys define the shape of the exterior glass façade, as if the natural forces of erosion wore down the tower into a few thin lines. Flowing down the façade, the lines emphasise the smoothness of the towers and its verticality.”
An additional benefit of this fluid design approach is that the ridges draw a natural breeze indoors, providing an energy efficient cooling system for building users. The development has received LEED Gold certification for its employment of natural lighting and air purification systems, as well as intelligent building design.
This perception of the elements eroding natural forms is continued to the four smaller buildings found south of the two main towers. These office blocks have been shaped to resemble river stones, washed smooth and rounded over a long period of time.
http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=24226

Look, if you want to make a bunch of glass buildings look like ancient Chinese cliffs and river-washed stones, I have no problem with that. Go for it. What bugs me isn't the design itself, nor the cost, but the dishonesty. If you want to indulge in design fantasies and stand out from the crowd, that's your prerogative, but don’t pretend that you’re somehow being "environmentally friendly" by going for a credential like LEED. Who are you fooling? And I like the part at the end about air purification systems – necessary because of China’s infamous air pollution. So your building can get green credits by screening out the air caused by the coal-fired power plants fueling all the economic growth (which generates more building, etc.).

Finally, I’ll outsource this one to Lloyd Alter.

(http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2014/04/games.jpg.650x0_q85_crop-smart.jpg)
The one percent enjoying their "green" lifestyle

The big European engineering and manufacturing powerhouse, ABB, is making a push into residential markets with their LivingSpace program, full of home automation, security and more. They show a truly lovely piece of architecture on the site (sorry about the nav button being there), a see-through glass box with some nice shades too. But somehow it doesn't seem appropriate to use it as a model for "Reducing the energy consumptions of our homes."
It is a beautiful site with unusual navigation that works well once you figure it out that things go sideways when you slide your finger down, but McLuhan said that the medium is the message, and the medium here is this big honking house. What's the message? That instead of building a house with walls, ABB will sell you "heaters, air conditioning, lights and blinds that automatically work together to create a comfortable atmosphere while minimizing energy to the max."
Perhaps I just don't understand advertising. I would have thought that anyone who cared about energy consumption would immediately ask themselves "why would I consider living in a place like that?" or "how much do I have to pay ABB to make that glass box comfortable?"
The title of the post sums it up: How to reduce your energy consumption: Buy a glass monster home and fill it with green gizmos (Treehugger)

Actually, the message is clear and is the same as the three LEED projects above -  "green" is a way for the job creators in their gigantic mansions to feel good about themselves and the direction society is headed.

Thus, the one percent can live in giant gizmo-filled “green" homes and jet off into space from their “green” spaceports while the rest of us are forececlosed upon and living in tarpaper shacks or under bridges. But I guess our low-impact lifestyle won't count as "green" will it? Welcome to the “green economy” – it’s a “green” economy if you have the “green” of money (with apologies to users of other currencies).

And that brings me to another conclusion that is counterintuitive. People tend to think that technologies like wind, solar, on-site water capture, and so on will empower the average person and local communities and loosen the power of centralized power structures. But what if the opposite is true? What if all these technologies hand the one percent even more power? Under our current socioeconomic system, what if these technologies allow the one percent to establish their libertarian utopia where they don’t need the rest of us and can tear up the social contract even further than they already have.

What brought this to mind was finding this old article from 2009: Inside the Indian Building Hillary Clinton Calls a Green Taj Mahal (Treehugger):
Located in the satellite city of Gurgaon, the ITC Green Center is said to reuse all the water that lands on it and recycles all the water it uses. Its insulated glass keeps out heat and lets in abundant natural light. Ten percent of its wood is certified, and its landscaping relies on local plant species. The building has reduced its energy and water consumption by 51 per cent and 40 per cent, respectively.
When it opened in 2005, it became the world's largest completed LEED platinum rated green office building. "If all new buildings were designed in the same standards as the ITC Green Centre, we could eventually cut global energy use and green house pollution by more than 20 percent and save money at the same time," she said.
With lower utility bills, the company will break even on its investment (given an extra cost of 12 per cent over a typical building) within five years and then begin to see subsequent savings.
"The monument is a building to the future. The Green Centre not only represents the promise of a green economy but also demonstrates the partnership of India and the US in the 21st century," she added.

Gurgaon is also home to the LEED platinum rated headquarters for Wipro. The building has saved the company Rs 1 crore in power costs annually, or 55 per cent of its energy consumption. The extra cost of its construction—six to eight per cent over a normal building—is expected to be recovered in five years.
The Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) is targeting 1,000 LEED certified buildings by 2010, up from 140 last year. Currently, green buildings covering 67 million sq ft are being constructed all over the country, up from 20,000 sq ft in 2003.

(http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/hillary-clinton-itc-green-center-new-delhi.jpg)
Green Building - good for elites like Hilllary, but bad for us?

Keep in mind, this is a country where millions of people still burn dung for heat and live without electricity or a toilet. Ever seen Slumdog Millionaire? And what does this company do?
As in China, the green building movement remains mostly relegated to large corporations, which have more capital to invest in sustainable practices and a significant interest in burnishing their reputations both at home and abroad.
In addition to the hospitality and IT industries, the ITC Group, the conglomerate behind the center, makes its money through tobacco.

As with SOM's "zero-energy" tower for the China National Tobacco Company, talking about health out of one side of your mouth and smoking with the other is hardly convincing.
Guragon, you may recall, is India’s “Voluntary City” a nice euphemism for the Neoliberal endgame for all of us. It’s the Libertarian wet dream. This is a city where there is no common anything; an area of no taxes or governance where it's every man for himself. Wealthy corporations pay for everything themselves, while the unlucky poor live in squalor. Here is the coverage of Guragon:

Gurgaon  has no publicly provided “functioning citywide sewer or drainage system; reliable electricity or water; public sidewalks, adequate parking, decent roads or any citywide system of public transportation.” Yet Gurgaon is a magnet for “India’s best-educated, English-speaking young professionals,” it has 26 shopping malls, seven golf courses, apartment towers, a sports stadium, five-star hotels and “a futuristic commercial hub called Cyber City [that] houses many of the world’s most respected corporations.” According to one survey, Gurgaon is India’s best city to work and live. So how does Gurgaon thrive? It thrives because in the absence of government the private sector has stepped in to provide transportation, utilities, security and more...
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2011/06/indias-voluntary-city.html

So this wealthy tobacco company just buys everything it needs, trucks in its privileged employees (just like in Silicon Valley) to a gated Elysium while everything outside the walls goes to hell and everyone not serving the corporate bottom line is left to fend for themselves without even basic infrastructure. This is the world the elites are building all over the globe! Behold the endgame of anti-government Neoliberalism. It has already brought about a radical divestment of the U.S. infrastructure, which is literally crumbling and falling down around us. What if things like wind and solar allow this situation to get even worse? Things like sewage systems, public transportation, and the electrical grid are already derided as “collectivism."

Who cares about making upgrades to the electrical grid we all use if you can just slap some solar panels on your multi-million dollar home or office building? Who cares about leaks in the water system, if you just harvest your own water? Who cares if the water is safe to drink for people if you can afford to buy your own private water filer? Who cares whether people can afford to light and heat their homes if you can just buy your own private diesel generator or hydrogen fuel cell and have your personal stash of fuel trucked in? It reminds me of Hurricane Sandy, when the general public lived without power for weeks while the rich lived in comfort and ease in their giant McMansions thanks to their diesel-powered generators and solar panels. This is the future.

What if what these technologies really do is allow the rich and powerful to abandon society to an even greater extent than they already have?

Now that the one percent don’t even need the commons to provide their power or their food anymore thanks to"green" technology, what will become of it - public transportation, public sewage systems, running water, natural gas, public trash collection and snowplowing, and the common electrical grid we're all hooked up to?

What will happen to the rest of us unfortunates who find ourselves on the outside of their gated compounds and office parks? Will we even have access to electricity and clean drinking water? If Guragon is humanity’s future then probably not. As the rich collect ever more of society’s wealth, they will continue to dismantle the wider society and put it into private hands, and "green" technology may actually help them do this – gated communities with all the latest “green” amenities – solar electricity, solar hot water, on-site water capture and filtration, air purifiers, locally grown food, etc., while the rest of us will be eating junk food made from processed corn while shivering in the dark, dying of cholera, and getting asthma from the coal-choked air. And the digital panopticon initiated by governments around the world watching us 24 hours a day will make sure even the very thought of dissent is strangled in its crib.So “green technology” may not be the benefit we all assume it is. It may even end up advancing the Neoliberal endgame even further.

Now, to be clear, this is a worst-case scenario. For the record, I’m for these technologies and I think they are a good idea to cope with an energy descent scenario as well as climate change. But I just want to highlight  the potential dark side to these technologies and how our current political and social arrangements may deploy these technologies in a way which is not to the benefit of most people, and may even be to the detriment of some, as in Guragon. I think we just assume that these technologies will make us all better off without thinking through the deeper questions.

P.S. - Please forgive the title of the post - I know it's a sweeping overstatement. I should have probably said LEED is a sham. It's just that in my city, entire swaths of the city are being bulldozed, people are losing their homes and tent cities are springing up, even as massive and expensive condominium towers for the wealthy are popping up downtown like dandelions in the spring, and most of them have the latest "green" amenities and LEED certification (and "certification" is literally all it is - just a plaque in the lobby).
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 04, 2014, 04:04:47 pm
 ::)

Okay Surly, I'll bite.  ;D


Here's a contrarian view to the half baked, cherry picking "contrarian view" article JDwheeler (e.g. another Doomer in the "caloric intake is IT" box canyon) which equates corrupt rich apples to sustainable building architecture oranges. 

QUESTION FOR DOOMERS:  But what if the opposite is true? What if the issue is NOT what the corrupt rich DO and have DONE in human power structures from day one but what the rest of us have done to make the planet livable? What if the continual buck passing rhetoric and hand wringing about how powerful the rich are and how we are truly forked unless a giant collapse pulls the rug out from these entrenched parasites ( because they allegedly will coopt any and all new technologies for their own private piggery)?

It's pretty G O D  D A M N E D  transparent how the motive of the article is to establish a basic (but entirely false) premise that ALL new technology that can solve our energy and sustainability issues will not reach the common man because the rich are

(A) suicidal,

(B) want a huge population cull so they must ensure that the environment is thoroughly trashed until 9/10 of the "ZOMBIES" die off AND/OR

(C) Profit over planet is too much fun for these evil pigs to give up and they just ain't gonna do it! 

SO, the "question" of "But what if the opposite is true?" is framed TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT with regard to the issue of sustainability, energy and the laws of thermodynamics in order to cleverly disguise the FACT that ANY technology can be used for good or evil by ASSUMING INCORRECTLY that ALL new technologies are "pie in the sky techno fixes" that WON'T WORK because RE and Doomer friends SAY SO, are wishful thinking out of the descending colons of Cornucopians and, in case we "idealistic, impractical dreamers hadn't noticed", the rich are incorrigible meanies that we cannot reform that must be OFFED (cue to RE's guillotine   (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6348.gif) (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg) or some other bloody graphic splashed with blood thirsty, vengeance filled joy). It's just FORKING amazing how the Doomer mentality rotates around offing the rich because they are an obstacle to all human progress while completely ignoring the facts about how MUCH technology HAS reached the common man and continues to do so for the betterment of the biosphere and our species (despite the huge amount of negative impact from wasteful and poisonous  technologies). They just don't want to go there. And it seems, Surly, neither do you.

So, even though I am convinced that YOU are convinced that the "contrarian" view has  so much merit that it should be given equal time with a hope filled scenario based on hard science and real technology, I present to you a properly framed QUESTION:


But what if the opposite is true? What if, despite all the coopting by the rich to accumulate more and more power with the use of the new technologies, said technologies result in the elimination of the use of fossil fuels, the  elimination of the production and use in our products of chemicals that alter our endochrine system, cause immunes system disorders and cancer and, the elimination of chemical fertilizers in food production,  the elimination of high thermal heat engines like nuclear power plants and internal combustion engines and a gradual healing of the biosphere?


WHY would those rich meanies allow such an outcome that might ruin a bit of their power trip parade because they then have to share a healthy planet with so many other humans?

BECAUSE they do not have any other choice. See Guy Mcpherson.  ;) Yes, I know Guy has his 30 positive feedback loops wiping out Homo sap in a few decades but the POINT is that the 1% are not going to sit on their hands with the hard data that serious people like Guy Mcpherson present. He doesn't believe in a viable outcome for us but ADMITS that he may be wrong. That said, I disavow EVERYTHING that Guy's website pals say about people suiciding themselves for the "good" of humanity. That's REALLY EVIL! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/www_MyEmoticons_com__burp.gif) And by the way, your pal RE has NO PROBLEM with people commiting suicide because he has NO MORALITY beyond caloric intake for survival of the "fittest". NOT a fun guy to be around if he is hungry and you are the only food around.  :P

Ask JDwheeler WHY, if you CAN grow bananas and heat a house in the Rockies WITHOUT a fossil fuel furnace or any other heat source but the sun SINCE 1983 (See Amory Lovins), most people aren't doing it? He will say because the rich prevented it or it's not really cost effective. Both are incorrect, but BASIC premises of the Doomer box canyon mindset.

You see, that was a trick question.   8)  If you take several hours over a week and watch the 5 video multi hour conference on energy efficiency in various human endeavors from construction to transportation, you will learn something that Doomers hate to admit and probably refuse to believe. That is, that GIANT steps in energy reduction through efficiency HAVE been made in many areas since the 1980s. We HAVE, without lowering comfort levels, managed to use about 20% (OR LESS) of the energy we "needed" in 1980   NOW to do EXACTLY THE SAME THINGS for heating, cooling, refrigeration, construction, communication and transportation.  8)

WATCH THE VIDEOS, Surly. It's ALL THERE! We are saving energy (NEGAWATTS) hand over fist! RE is pushing a bill of DOOMER goods. You don't have to believe a word I say. But please, watch the videos. Every ENERGY issue is dealt with as well as HOW the energy can be obtained and distributed SUSTAINABLY.

All that said, I admit and agree with you, RE and JDwheeler that the meanies in the 1% are evil forks. So what else is new? Tell me when this was not the case?

So they have, like, technology and  computers to herd us more thoroughly now. And? The abysmal ignorance that people like RE show about human history is testament to the grave error of assuming that we are far more oppressed now than any other time in history. That is TOTAL BS. But I'm NOt going to sit here and argue quixotically about history to those who believe we were better ,nicer and more decent when we wielded swords or bows and arrows or whatever.

I have been researching LAW for the past three months. LAW is the application of cultural mores to a societal framework that ALWAYS favors the powerful but MUST pay tribute to the common man in order to provide a framework for a stable society (revolutions happen when you oppress the rubes too much). Most LAW in Western Civilization comes from Roman and Germanic codes. You DO NOT want to know what "freedom" you had under those codes, Surly. :P  They have evolved over the centuries with the Magna Carta and French contributions to a more equitable system. Inheritance laws, tort, and penal codes are horribly distorted in earlier centuries so the rich can do whatever the fork they want and have you imprisoned or killed for a trifle.

It is HYPERBOLE, the DD's specialty, to claim that things are WORSE now for the average citizen than they were in more primitive times. BUT, it is NECESSARY for RE and the like to push this false meme in order to justify their inability to countenance the possibility of human progress through technology. I accuse the DD of being in THAT box canyon. And they CAN'T GET OUT OF IT because the instant they admit there is hope, the sine qua non for the DD mindset VANISHES!

So they will ALWAYS GRASP at the "contrarian" STRAW that no progress is possible because the rich have us by the short hairs.
It's quite logical. Re is running a scary movie scenario that is lots of fun for him. You (and I, for a while) fell for it. Get real Surly. The DD is like the Cults that keep pushing the date when Christ returns to earth into the future when the one that didn't pan out comes and goes (after people have sold their houses and given the money to the top dog "spiritual" leader  ;) ). It's fun for a while but it is not reality based, period.

Now you can smirk, huff and puff, laugh at me or you can do what a serious inquiry of the validity of my allegations requires and watch these videos. Take a week, take a month but YOU have a responsibility to tell people with a Master's Degree in Agriculture (I think) like JDwheeler that they do not know what they are talking about for their own good.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/129fs238648.gif)


Energy efficiency 1 Amory Lovins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=O5txQlEI7bc
The meat of the matter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=O5txQlEI7bc#t=4075
Energy efficiency 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8kUih_t9aCs
Energy efficiency 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RjcWx7U1sjQ
Energy efficiency 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=zW6gWZD4394
Energy efficiency 5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=x-9jd2OMwJQ
The next industrial revolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=1zfO3HW6xCw

 
 
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 04, 2014, 07:02:21 pm
Quote
Most Present Day Engineering is based on Ideology, NOT FACTS and the practical application of the laws of physics.  :o  :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFWXMmmiihk&feature=player_embedded
Negawatts and air (cold or hot) movement in buildings with a view to duct design, air filters, pump design and placement and pressure drop air handling fun and games: 80 to 90% LESS energy use for MORE efficient air movement! MASSIVE savings potential for buildings all over the world!
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: Surly1 on May 04, 2014, 09:42:01 pm
AG, do you really think I posted this here to mess with you?
You are the only individual I k ow knowledgeable enough about these issues to form a useful counter-perspective to what I found to be a disturbing article.


Quote from: AG
  But what if the opposite is true? What if, despite all the coopting by the rich to accumulate more and more power with the use of the new technologies, said technologies result in the elimination of the use of fossil fuels, the  elimination of the production and use in our products of chemicals that alter our endochrine system, cause immunes system disorders and cancer and, the elimination of chemical fertilizers in food production,  the elimination of high thermal heat engines like nuclear power plants and internal combustion engines and a gradual healing of the biosphere?

An excellent question. I considered the thrust of the article in the context of the wholesale retreat from any notion of a "commons" and E Pluribus Unum iin the political sphere. Seen the movie Elysium? Depicts a likely end-game scenario.

Quote from: AG
 
WHY would those rich meanies allow such an outcome that might ruin a bit of their power trip parade because they then have to share a healthy planet with so many other humans?

Because now they have the means to do so, in a way they have never really possessed that means before. You DO know that they don't serve GMO foods in the Monsanto cafeterias, don't you?

Quote from: AG
BECAUSE they do not have any other choice. See Guy Mcpherson.  ;) Yes, I know Guy has his 30 positive feedback loops wiping out Homo sap in a few decades but the POINT is that the 1% are not going to sit on their hands with the hard data that serious people like Guy Mcpherson present. He doesn't believe in a viable outcome for us but ADMITS that he may be wrong. That said, I disavow EVERYTHING that Guy's website pals say about people suiciding themselves for the "good" of humanity. That's REALLY EVIL!  And by the way, your pal RE has NO PROBLEM with people commiting suicide because he has NO MORALITY beyond caloric intake for survival of the "fittest". NOT a fun guy to be around if he is hungry and you are the only food around.  :P

This goes into the list of nominees for the all time greatest non-sequiturs of all time. You have a serious bone to pick with RE; I suggest you pick it with him. I represent my own ideas, which I have articulated as carefully as I know how. On some things, I agree within him; on others, not. You have not forgotten the Orkin Man/guillotine/Pol Pot/this way lies madness debates, have you?

Quote from: AG
 
Ask JDwheeler WHY, if you CAN grow bananas and heat a house in the Rockies WITHOUT a fossil fuel furnace or any other heat source but the sun SINCE 1983 (See Amory Lovins), most people aren't doing it? He will say because the rich prevented it or it's not really cost effective. Both are incorrect, but BASIC premises of the Doomer box canyon mindset.

You see, that was a trick question.   8)  If you take several hours over a week and watch the 5 video multi hour conference on energy efficiency in various human endeavors from construction to transportation, you will learn something that Doomers hate to admit and probably refuse to believe. That is, that GIANT steps in energy reduction through efficiency HAVE been made in many areas since the 1980s. We HAVE, without lowering comfort levels, managed to use about 20% (OR LESS) of the energy we "needed" in 1980   NOW to do EXACTLY THE SAME THINGS for heating, cooling, refrigeration, construction, communication and transportation.  8)
//
All that said, I admit and agree with you, RE and JDwheeler that the meanies in the 1% are evil forks. So what else is new? Tell me when this was not the case?

So they have, like, technology and  computers to herd us more thoroughly now. And? The abysmal ignorance that people like RE show about human history is testament to the grave error of assuming that we are far more oppressed now than any other time in history. That is TOTAL BS. But I'm NOt going to sit here and argue quixotically about history to those who believe we were better ,nicer and more decent when we wielded swords or bows and arrows or whatever.

I have been researching LAW for the past three months. LAW is the application of cultural mores to a societal framework that ALWAYS favors the powerful but MUST pay tribute to the common man in order to provide a framework for a stable society (revolutions happen when you oppress the rubes too much). Most LAW in Western Civilization comes from Roman and Germanic codes. You DO NOT want to know what "freedom" you had under those codes, Surly. :P  They have evolved over the centuries with the Magna Carta and French contributions to a more equitable system. Inheritance laws, tort, and penal codes are horribly distorted in earlier centuries so the rich can do whatever the fork they want and have you imprisoned or killed for a trifle.

It is HYPERBOLE, the DD's specialty, to claim that things are WORSE now for the average citizen than they were in more primitive times. BUT, it is NECESSARY for RE and the like to push this false meme in order to justify their inability to countenance the possibility of human progress through technology. I accuse the DD of being in THAT box canyon. And they CAN'T GET OUT OF IT because the instant they admit there is hope, the sine qua non for the DD mindset VANISHES!

So they will ALWAYS GRASP at the "contrarian" STRAW that no progress is possible because the rich have us by the short hairs. It's quite logical. Re is running a scary movie scenario that is lots of fun for him. You (and I, for a while) fell for it. Get real Surly. The DD is like the Cults that keep pushing the date when Christ returns to earth into the future when the one that didn't pan out comes and goes (after people have sold their houses and given the money to the top dog "spiritual" leader  ;) ). It's fun for a while but it is not reality based, period.

Now you can smirk, huff and puff, laugh at me or you can do what a serious inquiry of the validity of my allegations requires and watch these videos. Take a week, take a month but YOU have a responsibility to tell people with a Master's Degree in Agriculture (I think) like JDwheeler

You really work up quite a head of steam, doncha?

Believe it or not, I did not post this here to tweak you or mock you. I was seriously interested in your response. Not smirking, huffing and puffing. You don't see DD anymore, but you seem to have an encyclopedic of view of what goes on there. I can tell you that we've been combating trolls for weeks; and I am sick to death of arguing with people.

And now I have hours of videos to view.

And PS-- you were oh-so-right about the effete Golden Oxen.
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 05, 2014, 02:17:00 am
Surly,
I know that I can be a royal pain in the ass on this renewable energy thing. I am not saying you aren't an independent thinker. I AM saying the DD SUCKS. I will say it over and over because RE is an ego fortress of hyperbole that dominates the majority view there. 

All that said, I don't think you are "messing" with me. I am just angry as hell about what is going on with my court case and I guess I took it out on you. Sorry.  :-[

Well, tomorrow is another day... We'll see what the latest court order directed at me because the bank lawyer lied through her teeth (and I can't prove it!) says to me. When it's all over and I am totally defeated, I'll give a synopsis of it if I can get up the energy.

You see, I, like you, just get tired of this whole renewable energy thing versus what the 1% want to do and are stupid enough to do it might happen. To me, renewable energy is like gravity. It's a no-brainer and every creature on earth, including mankind for most of his existence, has used it in a multifaceted way. I am no longer really trying to convince anyone of the wisdom of the renewable energy path. IT's the material cure for our "disease". I do admit that without spiritual progress, it will be another postponement like the fossil fuel age. I just don't give the importance that you do to political systems. Perhaps you can post some of your political posts here. I'll read them. I just don't like politics. I have a section on power and politics here but I put stuff there because it has to be addressed as a thorn in man's side. That is why I do the knee jerk reaction thing when renewable energy is challenged as a REAL aid to humanity versus political solutions that never amount to more than another Potemkin circus for the rubes. Think about it. Maybe I am the one in denial but I just will not concede that it is over because the rich have all the technology marbles. Time will tell.

I read a piece by RE on Mike Ruppert at Guy Mcpherson's web site and read the comments too. It was refreshing to watch him get spanked in a place he couldn't pull that Godfader BS.  ;D It was sad to watch him try to put a guilt trip on Guy for allowing the advocacy of suicide (particularly for geezers like myself!) when RE advocates violence against TPTB on a regular basis. That's why I mentioned him. I know you do NOT share his preoccupation with offing the piggies.  I'll try to leave him out of the conversation from now on.

If you don't mind, please fill me in on GO's latest antics. A little gossip might improve my mood.  ;D



Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 05, 2014, 02:34:46 pm
Surly,
This is one more giant step being taken in renewable energy (the avoidance and eventual ELIMINATION OF MINING for raw materials - a MAJOR source of pollution that has NOTHING to do with the successes or failures of LEEDs certification in "green" buildings - see cherry picking) that the 1% are not inhibiting in any way. As a matter of fract, the 1% that own all these processes are backing closed loop recycling.

Closed Loop Recycling

By Martin Murray

Introduction

Closed loop recycling is the process where post-consumer waste is collected, recycled and used to make new products. But in the closed loop all participants should work together to make sure that the flow continues. In the example of recycling aluminum cans, the consumer purchases beverage cans that are made from recycled material, and they consume the contents. The can is then collected from the consumer as part of their normal recycling pickup, and then combined with other aluminum cans to create raw materials which are sold to the manufacturer, who in turn produces new cans, made from recycled materials.

How to Make Closed Loop Recycling Work

The easiest way to make a closed loop system to work is to recycle every item that can be recycled, ensure that the manufacturers want to purchase post-consumer recycled material, and that the customer wants to buy products made from recycled material. These assumptions are not always possible to achieve and the closed loop is difficult to attain. However some materials, such as aluminum and glass, can be recycled indefinitely and these materials offer the best chance of closed loop recycling.

Glass recycling has been working for decades. Bottles were used where there was a deposit paid on the bottle so that it was returned, or milk bottles that were picked up daily by the milkman. An estimated eighty percent of collected glass is recycled and used to make more glass containers. The Glass Packaging Institute estimates that in California, almost eighty percent of glass containers are recycled, whereas nationally the figure is closer to fifty percent, but that glass bottles and jars are totally recyclable and can be recycled endlessly without any loss in purity or quality. Glass container manufacturers set a goal that by 2013 there would have fifty percent recycled content in the products they produce.

Aluminum recycling has been as successful as glass recycling, with an estimated 68 percent of each aluminum can sold in the US is made from recycled materials. Two thirds of the aluminum ever produced is still in the processing cycle today. However still a large amount of aluminum is placed in landfills which recyclers calculate is as much as $600 million each year. For the closed loop system to work those items need to be collected not disposed of.

Other Closed Loop Recycling

Companies are trying to make closed loop systems of more specific items. The car manufacturer, Mazda, has developed a process where they can recycle the fenders from vehicles that are being scrapped and make them into new fenders for new vehicles. The company has been designing their vehicles with recycling in mind, and since the 1990's the company had designed its fenders to be more recyclable. Mazda developed technology where they can recycle used fenders from vehicles, into raw plastic resin for use in new vehicle fenders. Their technology allows the plastic from any age of vehicle to be combined to produce new items.

Another car manufacturers, Ford, has plans to use a polyester seat fabric in its vehicles that is created from a blend of recycled materials, including post-industrial fiber waste and post-consumer PET plastic bottles. By using this fabric used from recycled plastic bottles, the company says it can divert 2 million plastic bottles from going to landfills.

Shaw Industries, the leading floor covering manufacturer, is an example of a company that saw that consumers wanted a greener product and delivered it. In 2003 they introduced a recyclable carpet tile that can be recycled into new carpet tiles at its end of life, thus saving carpet from being sent to landfills.

Even small companies are creating a closed loop. A small dog toy manufacturer called West Paw encourages consumers to return used dog toys, dog beds, apparel and other items to the company so that they can be reprocessed into making new items.   (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-062.gif)

 



Suggested Reading
•Recycling Waste
•Green Supply Chain
•Green Supply Chain Best Practices


Related Articles
•Closed Loop Logistics and Recycling
•Glass Recycling - Benefits of Glass Recycling - Why Recycle Glass?
•How Recycling Creates New Jobs
•What Can Be Recycled? Confusion About Recycling Addressed by New Initiative
•Asphalt Shingle Recycling Overview

http://logistics.about.com/od/greensupplychain/a/Closed-Loop-Recycling.htm
Title: US Building Efficiency Was Worth More Than Clean Electricity in 2013
Post by: AGelbert on May 12, 2014, 01:36:16 am
Agelbert NOTE: Thank Amory Lovins, who coined the term NEGAWATTS, for energy NON-use applications in building and powerplant design for efficiency.   ;D

US Building Efficiency Was Worth More Than Clean Electricity in 2013


Buildings are becoming a big part of the advanced energy economy.

Stephen Lacey
February 20, 2014

America's building sector often gets criticized for being an inefficient drain on the country's electricity system. At the same time, the natural gas industry gets held up as an economic miracle for the grid. But does that perception match reality?

A new analysis suggests that those assessments may be a little skewed -- at least when it comes to yearly revenues in those sectors.

Advanced Energy Economy, a clean energy business advocacy group co-founded by billionaire activist Tom Steyer, has released a report valuing the global advanced energy sector using data from Navigant Research. The report found that the global advanced energy economy -- which includes efficient transport, biofuels, commercial and industrial efficiency, and clean electricity generation -- was valued at $1.1 trillion in 2013.

The U.S. made up 15 percent of the global total across that wide range of sectors, with a $169 billion market.

Looking deeper into the numbers, a counterintuitive trend emerges: building efficiency revenues actually outpaced revenues in the clean electricity sector in 2013.

The report breaks down building efficiency subsectors into the categories of environmental design, HVAC upgrades, lighting, water heating, district heating, demand response and building energy management software. Taken together, these subsectors represented $43.9 billion in U.S. revenues and $150 billion worldwide.

The analysis focused on clean electricity factors in the solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, nuclear, natural gas turbine and fuel cell subsectors. Combined, those technologies brought in $31.3 billion in revenues within the U.S. and $384 billion worldwide, according to the report.

Globally, revenues in clean electricity generation were more than twice those in the building efficiency space. But in the U.S., the building efficiency sector brought in roughly one-third more revenue last year, according to the report. That's a significant gap, and it illustrates the steady (and sometimes hidden) investment underway in the built environment.

Wind and natural gas are often hailed as the dominant forces in the clean energy sector. In 2013, however, wind investments plummeted due to uncertainty about the federal production tax credit. Orders for natural gas turbines have also also declined over the last two years as older plants are utilized more efficiently and flattening electricity sales slow investment in new infrastructure. Meanwhile, investment in building efficiency is increasing steadily, rivaling the top generation technologies.

Even with a strong showing for wind and gas in 2012, the clean electricity sector only brought in about $6 billion more revenue than the building efficiency space.

These figures back up a couple of recent studies on the value of efficiency.

In April 2013, sustainable architecture expert Ed Mazria analyzed EIA data and concluded that theoretically, no new power plants need to be constructed to service America's 60 billion square feet of new buildings by 2030. That's because new construction is becoming so efficient that building energy consumption will see a steep decline even under a business-as-usual scenario, according to the EIA.

Also last year, ACEEE energy economist Skip Laitner compared economy-wide investments in efficiency to energy production for the year 2010, finding that America spent three and a half times the amount of money on efficiency upgrades that it spent on energy supply.

"One immediate conclusion from this assessment is that the productivity of our economy may be more directly tied to greater levels of energy efficiency rather than a continued mining and drilling for new energy resources," wrote Laitner.


It would be premature to draw any definitive conclusions from the data in this latest AEE report. But the analysis does suggest once again that building efficiency is a much bigger force that people assume.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif) And if investment keeps its current pace, it will likely continue to rival the more visible clean electricity sector.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)


Tags: building efficiency, building energy management

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Building-Efficiency-Was-Worth-More-Than-Clean-Electricity-Generation
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 21, 2014, 09:01:01 pm
(http://elqahera-trading.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dollar-sign-thumbnail1.jpg)  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)
Better Buildings Neighborhood Initiative Upgrades 100,000 Buildings, Saves $730 Million on Energy Bills

May 21, 2014 - 4:06pm

CONTACT
•(202) 586-4940

Building on President Obama’s Climate Action Plan and the Administration’s Better Buildings Initiative, the Energy Department announced today that the Department’s Better Buildings Neighborhood Program has helped more than 40 state and local governments upgrade more than 100,000 buildings and save families and businesses over $730 million on utility bills. Supported by the Recovery Act, the Energy Department’s Better Buildings Neighborhood Program worked with 41 competitively selected state and local governments and their partners to upgrade the energy efficiency of homes and local buildings and leverage early federal funds to launch sustainable community-based programs.

In the United States, residential and commercial buildings account for about 40 percent of all energy use,” said Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz. “Upgrading the energy efficiency of our homes and other buildings will save families and businesses money on utility bills and reduce pollution in our communities, moving the nation closer to our clean energy future.”

Over the last four years, these state and local governments have partnered with utilities, nonprofit organizations, financial institutions and building efficiency experts to upgrade more than 100,000 homes and other buildings. The initial $508 million federal investment leveraged another $1 billion in other public and private sector funding and supported more than $740 million in direct invoices to local workers for energy assessments and upgrades they performed. Local direct investments and savings will continue to grow as leveraged funds are used to finance future energy efficiency project upgrades.

All in all, more than 1,400 home improvement contractors completed upgrades for homeowners. Approximately 30 programs out of the original 40 are continuing without federal support, including programs in Oregon, Maine, Virginia and Florida.

To support continued public-private partnerships on residential energy efficiency, the Energy Department has launched the Better Buildings Residential Network, which currently includes 70 organizations. The network provides technical assistance and facilitates peer sharing for a wide range of stakeholders, including contractors, financial institutions, nonprofits, state and local governments, and utilities, who share best practices on home energy efficiency program strategies. Membership is open to all organizations interested in expanding the market for residential energy efficiency. (http://elqahera-trading.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dollar-sign-thumbnail1.jpg)  (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)



Find more information on how the Better Buildings Initiative is saving communities throughout the country energy and money at www.energy.gov/better-buildings.

http://energy.gov/articles/better-buildings-neighborhood-initiative-upgrades-100000-buildings-saves-730-million-energy
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 25, 2014, 07:26:13 pm
Methodist Church In North Carolina Celebrating Energy From The Sun  ;D
Read more at http://cleantechnica.com/2014/05/25/methodist-church-north-carolina-celebrating-energy-sun/#8r3kAIyU3Q30pC2Y.99
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 18, 2014, 01:53:01 pm
Can You Build A Safe, Sustainable Skyscraper Out Of Wood?

By Andrew Breiner 
June 18, 2014 at 9:43 am

North America’s tallest modern all-wood building is nearing completion in Prince George, British Columbia, but it might not hold that high rank for long. Other wood buildings are in the works across the world as it gains a reputation for climate friendliness, beauty, and yes, even fire safety.  ;D

The Wood Innovation Design Centre will be a six-story building, the maximum for a wood building under British Columbia’s building code, but the Centre’s high ceilings mean it will be about as tall as the average 10-floor building. It’ll join the current highest and second-highest modern wood buildings, respectively, a ten-story Melbourne residential building and a nine-story London apartment building.

But no new wood building yet has surpassed the world’s tallest, built in the 18th century. The Kizhi Pogost is a UNESCO World Heritage Site located on an island in northern Russia, and has a central cupola 37 meters high, a few meters above the tops of the new wood high-rises. But it likely won’t hold onto the title of tallest wood building for long.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aRAkheGeuEA/UqjG-_U7qhI/AAAAAAAARs4/yC8zWwAxx4M/s1600/RUSSIA+-+Kizhi+3.jpg)
The Kizhi Pogost

One all-wood building in northern Norway will be 17 stories high, and there’s also talk of a more theoretical 34-story wooden skyscraper in Sweden.

A lot of wood’s appeal is counter-intuitive.  :o It’s not a bigger fire risk — in fact, thick wood planks stay strong in a fire, forming a protective char that keeps the integrity of the material intact. Steel can lose its strength when it burns, becoming “like spaghetti,” according to B.J. Yeh of the Engineered Wood Association.

This new interest in wood is driven in part by the rise of cross-laminated timber (CLT), essentially a highly advanced form of plywood that can rival steel in strength. It works, basically, by gluing and pressing small beams together into giant boards that can be up to six inches thick, and are custom-sized for their part of a construction project.

Though the Lorax turned a generation off to logging, cutting down trees is actually a sustainable way to build. Trees collect CO2 from the air as they grow, storing it in their wood. If the tree is cut down and its wood used to build, that carbon is sequestered, unable to contribute to warming. That’s especially notable in comparison to the amount of carbon emitted in the manufacture of steel and concrete. The benefit of carbon storage is so great that Stadthaus, the wood high-rise in London, will actually be carbon negative for the first 20 years of operation due to its construction materials. And of course, trees are a renewable resource when farmed sustainably.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/treeswing.gif)

And lumber construction could help out with another climate-related problem. Pine beetles, in a population explosion fueled by climate change, have killed tens of thousands of square miles of forests across the country. But trees killed by pine beetles are still suitable for use in construction. And when communities afflicted by pine beetles are paying just to get rid of huge areas of dead trees, a booming lumber market could make sure they’re put to good use, with their carbon stored in buildings rather than burned into the atmosphere.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

Building codes in cities and countries around the world limit the height of new wood buildings, reflecting safety concerns that new technologies have solved. So the wood boom will depend, at least in part, on getting the new reality: wood high-rises are safer, and more sustainable, than ever.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/06/18/3449440/wood-skyscrapers-sustainable-building/

Agelbert NOTE: The following is an example of extremely high tech Renewable Energy biotechnology AND spectacular form with function beauty that Homo sap has not been able to figure out, let alone duplicate in efficiency, strength and sustainablility.  To be watched while listening to a certain Vivaldi piece.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180614133106.gif) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180614134929.gif)

Only a person ignorant of the factorial function in the science of  probability and statistics could claim that the above biotechnology happened by "random mutations".  (http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/userpics/12962/noway.gif)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on July 31, 2014, 11:05:46 pm
Amory Lovins’ high-tech home skimps on energy but not on comfort   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/treeswing.gif)

SNIPPET 1:
For most of its history, environmentalism has been associated with a back-to-the-land lifestyle: being one with nature, living in the woods, wearing sandals, maybe driving a Volkswagen. Over the last decade, a counter-narrative has taken over. Cities are in. As climate change has become the dominant environmental issue, a low-carbon lifestyle has become the priority. Denser living is heralded for its energy efficiency, as are walking, biking and taking transit instead of driving.

All other things being equal, walkable urbanism beats sprawl. But one house in Old Snowmass, Colo., demonstrates that, with the right design, rural living can be about as low-carbon as possible. And it turns out those hippies were on to something: the secrets to low-impact rural housing lie in embracing nature instead of combatting it. Plus it helps to have some bleeding-edge technology.

Amory Lovins, the owner of the house, is exactly the guy you’d expect to live here. A bespectacled physicist and world-renowned energy-efficiency expert, he cofounded the Rocky Mountain Institute in 1982 with his then-wife L. Hunter Lovins. They chose this location, nestled up in the mountains 14 miles from Aspen, for RMI’s first headquarters, which they built as a model of energy efficiency. The original structure was completed in 1984. Today, RMI has expanded into other buildings, but Lovins still lives in the original house, which got a high-tech makeover in 2009.

Snippet 2:
Many suburbanites have rejected the housing styles best suited to their specific environments (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif), instead embracing a generic image of the American Dream that is often  ;D  ;)  regionally inappropriate.

Snippet 3:
In an arid mountainous area, the sun is strong during the day. So the 16-inch thick walls — made of concrete, locally harvested sandstone, and a middle four inches of polyurethane — are adept at storing heat throughout the day and retaining it overnight. Typically, an architect would recommend increasing the wall thickness until the point where the marginal savings on heating are passed by the increased costs of building. But Lovins went twice as thick, thereby eliminating the need to build a heating system at all.  ;D  “We saved $1,100, and that’s just on the building, never mind operating the heating,” Lovins boasts.

Windows are a major source of air leakage, so the building has “super-windows,” which have microscopically thin layers of gases such as krypton and xenon that let in light but prevent heat exchange. “It’s equal to 16 layers of glass but it uses only two layers and costs less than three,”  :o  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/8.gif) says Lovins.

Keeping rooms warm is not the only purpose for which most houses require oil or natural gas. To make a “combustion-free” house, Lovins had to solve a few other problems such as drying clothes and heating water. The answer is to harness the sun’s natural heating power. Although they have a dryer, Lovins and his current wife Judy usually hang their clothes on a line that can be raised by pulley up into a skylight and dried in the sunlight. They heat water through eight thermal solar panels and send it around the house through pipes that are extra wide and turn at gentle angles to minimize the electricity needed to move it.

Snippet 4:
The house’s electricity is all renewable. Massive solar panels adorn the roof, carport, and grounds alongside the building. The panels produce far more solar power during the day than the Lovinses use, so they sell electricity to the grid during the day and buy wind energy from the grid at night. They also store the solar power in batteries so that they could be fully self-sufficient in a blackout. The batteries would run down at night but be recharged during the day. “In February 2013, there were five power failures [in the area], and we never lost power,” says Lovins.

FULL ARTICLE AND BANANAS IN THE ROCKIES PICTURES HERE: (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/Banane21.gif)


http://grist.org/climate-energy/amory-lovins-high-tech-home-skimps-on-energy-but-not-on-comfort/
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on August 04, 2014, 10:23:02 pm
Green Building Spotlight: Climate Ribbon Replaces Air Conditioning in Miami  ;D
SustainableBusiness.com News
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25845
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on August 15, 2014, 07:29:33 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6STW6TXuWc&feature=player_embedded
Bauhaus: 100% Solar, Electric Houseboat in Action

http://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/bauhaus-100-solar-electric-houseboat-action.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on August 23, 2014, 04:16:50 pm
(http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/imageupload/NZP.jpg)
08/22/2014 02:42 PM        

Electrical Unions Launch Net-Zero Energy Training Center for Members

SustainableBusiness.com News


Thousands of electrical workers will soon be trained each year as "Total Solution Providers" - skilled in the most advanced energy efficiency, renewable energy and smart grid technologies.
Opening next year, the Net Zero Plus Electrical Training Institute in Los Angeles will train union members in demand response, grid reliability technology, utility-scale battery storage, advanced building and lighting controls, and plug load strategies.

The project is a collaboration between International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 11 and Los Angeles Chapter of the National Electrical Contractors Association (LA/NECA).

"The electrical industry is currently undergoing a revolution due to improved energy efficiency practices, integration of renewable energy on the grid, and developing clean technologies," says James Willson, Executive Director of LA/NECA. "Net Zero Plus is at the center of this revolution and will transform the way buildings use, produce, store, and sell energy."   ;D

It will be housed in a 142,000 square foot building being renovated as a net-zero energy facility.
Mostly US-made products will be featured at the "living lab and demonstration center" where emerging technologies will be tested, showcased, and even commercialized.

For example, the facility will house Smart Microgrids of various sizes to demonstrate how existing electrical infrastructure can be integrated with advanced electronics, battery storage, PV solar panels, and advanced lighting controls. A utility-scale system will integrate 12 vehicle-charging stations and a high-efficiency chilled water system.

Also integrated into the building will be energy efficient building technologies such as plug load strategies, data management, operable and dimmable skylights, extremely efficient industrial fans, exterior solar shading, and high Solar Reflective Index roofing material.

This is the second net-zero energy training center in California for electricians. The much smaller one in San Leandro, California fosters advanced skills in building automation, lighting control and on-site power generation.

IBEW's interest in advanced energy dates back to 2002, when they added solar PV to their headquarters in San Jose, California - also used to train electricians. The union later added solar systems on IBEW training centers in New York, California, New Jersey and other states to use for training.

These skills will be highly valued in California as the state moves toward net-zero energy for new residential construction by 2020 and commercial construction by 2030.

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25877
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on August 24, 2014, 03:46:34 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gABZ5uYOwCc&feature=player_embedded

Carbon-Neutral Office Space?    ;D

 This virtually self sustaining office building is now built! At the edge of Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood, the Bullitt Center as of April 2013, has two thirds of the space already leased.

 It's beyond simply being "green". All its water will be supplied by rainwater collected in a 56,000 gallon cistern. They have composting toilets, a grand staircase with a view to discourage elevator use, and rooftop photovoltaics ready to produce 230,000 kilowatt hours a year, hopefully enough to break even with the energy use of the building.

 The goal is to prove that carbon-neutral office space can be commercially viable. And they encourage copycats!

 From the website www.bullittcenter.org:

 "The goal of the Bullitt Center is to change the way buildings are designed, built and operated to improve long-term environmental performance and promote broader implementation of energy efficiency, renewable energy and other green building technologies in the Northwest.

 The building is seeking to meet the ambitious goals of the Living Building Challenge, the world’s most strenuous benchmark for sustainability.

 For example, a solar array will generate as much electricity as the building uses and rain will supply as much water, with all wastewater treated onsite.

 By creating a place where every worker has access to fresh air and daylight, the Bullitt Center will create a healthy, human environment that is more pleasant and more productive than most commercial buildings."

 Amen!

 --Bibi Farber

 For more information see: www.bullittcenter.org

 This video was produced by www.theSeattleTimes.com
- See more at: http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/most-sustainable-office-building-in-the-us.html#sthash.sFdllWkX.dpuf
Title: Breaking Ground on RMI’s Groundbreaking Building
Post by: AGelbert on October 09, 2014, 09:33:40 pm
Breaking Ground on RMI’s Groundbreaking Building  ;D

Next week on October 15, Rocky Mountain Institute breaks ground on the exciting construction of our new building—the RMI Innovation Center—in Basalt, Colorado. The downtown Basalt location is just down the road from where RMI was founded over 32 years ago and where our co-founder and chief scientist, Amory Lovins, lives in his legendary energy-efficient home known as the Lovins GreenHome.

Continuing RMI’s presence in the Roaring Fork Valley near Aspen is an important ingredient in our ability to reach our audience and the global leaders we hope to collaborate with in our work. RMI’s market-driven, business-led approach to shifting from fossil fuels to efficiency and renewables requires collaboration with a diverse set of stakeholders. Our new building, with its convening center—the White Steyer Impact Studio—will provide an amazing venue to do just that.

Building on 32 years of RMI inspiring change in efficiency, this project will be the pinnacle of energy-efficient design, requiring no fossil fuels. Our dedicated and innovative design team, selected in early 2013, has been an extraordinary partner—and we’re all very excited to see the building take shape.

The project originated with four main goals:

 
•Create a building that exemplifies and amplifies RMI’s mission and program—taking RMI to its “next generation”
•Create the highest-performing building possible
•Create a replicable process and business case
•Create a beautiful structure focused on community outreach and occupant experience


The building, nearly 16,000 square feet in total, includes 7,750 square feet of workspace, 4,420 square feet of convening and collaboration spaces, and 3,440 square feet of amenities and support space. It is planned for 50 employees and convening events with up to 80 people, with space for breakout sessions. The building is designed with growth in mind and the site has been approved for 4,000 square feet of future expansion.

We believe this building will become a highly replicable and scalable model of excellent, cost-effective, integrative design. This 100-year building is one RMI will be proud of for generations to come.

And we hope to influence the industry with our approach. Like ours, 90 percent of commercial buildings are less than 25,000 square feet. Offices are the largest use of commercial buildings of this size, many of which are owner occupied. Many of the principles can also be applied to existing buildings, of which three-fourths will be retrofitted by 2035. In the building industry, we have experienced over and over that truly innovative case studies are game changers. It is an industry of followers, and as a leader in that industry, we are setting a strong example.

There are several things that set our building apart, including an integrated project delivery process, ultra-low energy use, substantial on-site renewable energy generation, and a pioneering greywater system.

Integrated Project Delivery

Integrated project delivery (IPD) is a compelling business construct that organizes the owner, architect, and general contractor in a tri-party agreement, breaking down the traditional hierarchy that disintegrates projects and creates suboptimal design solutions. In this multiparty agreement, we are all working towards a common goal, with skin in the game—there is a financial risk/reward pool that motivates all players to bring innovative ideas to the table to meet the very aggressive project goals while delivering the project on budget. This model has been used frequently on large-scale buildings but on only a handful of smaller buildings. The model has great potential but needs some simplification to make it more easily applied to small projects. RMI has been documenting our findings and lessons learned, including those from the architect and general contractor. We will release an honest summary of those findings once construction is complete and we finalize our project costs (and hopeful savings). Stay tuned…

Ultra-low energy use

With our roof-mounted solar photovoltaics, we will be net positive, producing more energy than we use on an annual basis. Energy use intensity (EUI) is to buildings what MPG is to cars. And our building has an exceptional EUI—four times less than the average energy use intensity for office buildings in the U.S., even before renewables are factored in. This building will have one of the lowest EUIs for commercial buildings in the U.S. at 16 kBtu/ft2, and will be one of less than 200 buildings that have achieved net-zero energy.

One of the major reasons our energy use is so low is that we are shifting the way comfort is provided to the occupants by putting it where they need it most: on their body. Most buildings condition the entire volume of air (including the top four feet of air above people’s heads). Instead we are heating and cooling the people, not the space, by looking at all six factors that affect a person’s thermal comfort—air temperature, wind speed, humidity, clothing level, activity level, and the temperature of the surrounding surfaces. This is a relatively new development in buildings science and we are applying it as has never been done before.

Besides incorporating thermal mass using phase-change material and a highly insulating envelope, we will be using Hyperchairs. The Hyperchair, developed by UC Berkeley’s Center for the Built Environment, is one of the only “high-tech” pieces of equipment in the building but a critical one. It is a chair that integrates heating and fans into the seat and back, at very low wattage, for individual comfort control (think of your car seats).

The combination of these strategies enables us to expand our air temperature set points from the typical 70 to 76 degrees F to a wider range of 64 to 82 degrees F. This cuts our energy use in half and enables us to entirely eliminate a central air conditioning system and minimize heating to a small, distributed system.

Renewable Energy

The south-facing solar photovoltaic system (approximately 80 kW) will enable the building to generate over 100 percent of its electricity on-site. Several electric vehicle (EV) charging stations will allow EV drivers to charge their cars with renewable electricity when parked at the Innovation Center. Eventually, when bidirectional EV chargers are available, the building will use the EV batteries to store energy and power the building during peak times.

Since RMI is a nonprofit, we cannot take advantage of the tax credits available for our PV system. We are working with CollectiveSun, a group out of California, to set up a power purchase agreement (PPA) between RMI and a third party that will give RMI an overall lower cost of solar than we would have if we purchased it outright. Plus, we will have a fixed cost for electricity for the next period of time, between 15 and 25 years, depending on how the contract is finalized. The solar is owned and maintained by the third party, who pays the initial costs for the system and sells us the power we need.

Greywater in Colorado


Colorado is lagging behind many states in legally implementing greywater reuse systems. This issue has been making headway at a state level and next year the necessary state agencies will hopefully pass regulations allowing legal implementation. It will then be up to local jurisdictions to adopt regulations. We are working closely with our jurisdiction and are planning ahead for when we can fully engage our greywater system. We will have dual plumbing in the walls and space in our mechanical room to easily add the required treatment and storage and hook up to our existing infrastructure. This system will eventually enable the building to use no potable water for toilet flushing. Once legal, our building will be one of the first to implement a greywater system, setting a precedent in Colorado. The building’s landscape is specifically designed to minimize irrigation needs, maximize rainwater use, and utilize 100 percent non-potable water, which will be provided by runoff water collected in a nearby pond.

If all these achievements—and more that you can read about on our website—aren’t enough to convince someone of possible energy savings, our building will achieve USGBC LEED Platinum, Living Building Challenge petal certification, LIFI Net Zero Energy certification, an anticipated Energy Star score of 100, and exceed the Architecture 2030 Challenge.

We intend to share what we have learned on this building through presentations, white papers, and blog posts during construction and operation. Once we’re in the building gin late 2015, we would be delighted to show you around.

Come visit and join us in our excitement for this breakthrough building!


“This building will create delight when entered, health and productivity when occupied, and regret when departed." Amory Lovins  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif), RMI Co-Founder and Chief Scientist


We are grateful to the many long-time friends and donors who have stepped up with early capital gifts to help make this building a reality. And to our talented team of experts —thank you for your passion and expertise to make this building the best it can be.

•ZGF Architects (architect of record)
•JE Dunn (general contractor)
•Graybeal Architects (local architect)
•Architectural Applications (high-performance design consultant)
•PAE Consulting Engineers, INC (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, IT)
•DHM Design (landscape architect)
•David Nelson & Associates, LLC (lighting designer)
•True North Management (owners representative)
•Sopris Engineering, LLC (civil engineer)
•KPFF Consulting Engineers (structural engineers)
•TG Malloy (land planner)
•Resource Engineering Group (commissioning)

http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2014_10_08_breaking_ground_on_rmis_groundbreaking_building
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on October 10, 2014, 06:05:19 pm
Net-Zero Neighborhoods Gaining Traction   (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)


Emily Hois
 October 10, 2014

The largest net-zero neighborhood in North America will be constructed more than a mile above sea level. All 308 houses in the Geos Neighborhood in Arvada, Colo. will harness sunlight and the earth’s core to generate as much energy as the homes consume.

But before the solar and geothermal technology comes into play, the design of these cottages and multi-family dwellings will reduce energy needs by 80 percent through efficiency concepts including passive solar collection and extreme air tightness. In fact, the layout of these residences at 5,540 feet will enable the homes to collect 60 percent of their winter heating needs through sunshine permeating the windows.

Homes Echo Values


Thanks to its monetary and environmental savings, energy efficiency is valued by both residents and housing developers along Colorado’s Front Range. Just ask New Town Builders. The Denver-based developer was one of the first in Colorado to offer production-scale net-zero homes, incorporating a 9.9 kilowatt (kW) solar photovoltaic system, in addition to energy saving appliances and efficiency designs. Originally priced in the mid $400,000s, New Town’s net-zero homes cost about $27,000 more than its homes without zero energy features.

For the second year in a row, New Town Builders was awarded by the U.S. Department of Energy for its innovation and energy efficiency, while maintaining interior comfort and durability. The company is also Colorado’s first production builder to include solar panels as a standard feature on its single-family homes in Denver.

Financial Obstacles

Today’s green building materials have a longer lifespan — between 20 and 50 years — which reduces maintenance costs, reveals Regency Builders President Jon Schoenheider. “A home built in 2014 saves almost 80 percent more in energy costs than homes built 10-plus years ago,” Schoenheider said.

Although the savings generated by net-zero residences can total several hundred dollars each month, the energy-saving features are seldom taken into account by mortgage underwriters. Therefore, it can be difficult to finance a net-zero home — even for the most seemingly-eligible buyer.

Offsetting Energy with Community Solar

Individuals who are unable to qualify for a mortgage on a net-zero home, or those who aren’t ready to buy a new house can still offset their household’s energy use — with community solar.

For example, Boulder-based Clean Energy Collective (CEC) allows any homeowner, renter, business or municipality to purchase enough photovoltaic (PV) panels to zero out their energy consumption. The solar panels are located in a centralized solar array that serves all residents within a given utility territory, such as the Denver Community Solar Arrays that serve Xcel Energy customers. Instead of the clean energy being generated and consumed by a single residence, the solar power is fed back to the utility grid and enables an entire community to benefit from locally-sourced, renewable energy.

Mainstream by 2020?

But for those determined to live in a net-zero dwelling, more options are becoming available every month. SunPower and KB Homes have just announced a partnership to build "double" net-zero energy homes that will feature solar electric panels and battery back-up, in addition to energy-efficient appliances and water recycling.

As net-zero communities continue to be tested by housing developers across the country, some experts predict that these buildings could hit the mainstream market as early as 2020.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/8.gif)


The original article was posted on the CEC blog.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2014/10/net-zero-neighborhoods-gaining-traction
Title: The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Commons
Post by: AGelbert on October 22, 2014, 02:16:51 pm
10/21/2014 01:54 PM     
Passive House Retrofit Provides Homes for Homeless Families

SustainableBusiness.com News

One of the few buildings in the US certified to "Passive House" standards will be home to low income and formerly homeless families in Washington DC. 

Called The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Commons, the deep retrofit of three blighted buildings combines state-of-the-art environmental design with affordable rents and support services for homeless families.

36 formerly homeless and low income families will not only have below-market rents, they will also get help finding employment, along with other services for youth and families. A third of the apartments are reserved for families with more intensive needs.


"Our goal is sustainability, not just in the environmental sense
, but in an economic sense to keep these families in a stable, supportive situation," says Polly Donaldson, executive director of the nonprofit co-developer Transitional Housing Corporation.

(graphics at link)
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25964
 Before:

Green Building Passive House Before

After, but still ugly, unfortunately:

Green Building Passive House After


The deep energy retrofit includes super-insulation, an air-tight
 building shell, energy recovery ventilation, tuned solar shading & high performance windows and extremely efficient active space conditioning, resulting in 60-90% lower energy demand than conventional buildings.
   (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)

That's in addition to renovated kitchen and bathrooms, façade improvements, a common laundry room and a community room with computer workstations.

 The development team: Zavos Architecture+Design, Hamel Builders, JDC Construction, Passive to Positive, Entellis Collaborative, Advanced Consulting Engineers, AMT Consulting Engineers, and SK&A DC. Transitional Housing Corporation functions as co-developer, landlord, and service provider. (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif)

Weinberg Commons is one of just 21 apartment buildings nationwide that are seeking Passive House certification, the most stringent standards to date that achieve net-zero energy buildings.   ;D

Driving growth of affordable, high performance buildings is one of six overarching goals of the ambitious Sustainable DC plan.    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)

Transitional Housing Corporation, which provides housing and
 comprehensive support services for over 500 homeless and at-risk families in Washington DC, purchased the complex.   (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-062.gif)

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25964
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on October 26, 2014, 07:19:14 pm
Green Idea House


100% Renewable Energy Goal Achieved: Net Zero, Carbon Emissions Free , Cost-Effective Home Retrofit 

Location: Hermosa Beach, California, USA

(http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/styles/large/public/stories_green_idea.jpg?itok=RaQVRUz0)
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-081.gif)

(http://www.housetalkgreen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/20121113-150513.jpg)


Summary:

The Green Idea House is a simple and replicable – yet cost effective – case study in creating a ‘net zero energy and zero carbon’ home in Coastal California and similar regions. Net zero energy means that the house will annually produce as much energy as it consumes, and zero carbon means that the house will not produce any carbon emissions.

This approach accelerates progress toward the California Public Utilities Commission’s goal that “All new residential construction in California will be zero net energy by 2020.” The local investor owned utility Southern California Edison chose it as the cornerstone case study to facilitate the transformation of residential construction to net zero energy by 2020, studying a real project on a constrained lot being undertaken by motivated residents with a limited budget.

When the Fortunato family needed to expand and remodel their modest home on a small city lot, the prospect of building green was daunting and the learning curve steep. As a result, they felt compelled to share what they were learning and create a community around the idea that anyone should be able to build affordably, sustainably, and with energy efficiency in mind.    (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)

The process of designing, constructing and showcasing this project created a robust collaborative involving private, public and non-profit organizations. The Fortunatos used this team, as well as their own passionate persistence and curiosity, to identify and utilize materials that had the lowest lifecycle ecological impact, while still being affordable and readily available.

The final outcome was a remodel that, at $200/square foot (before factoring in federal and state incentives for solar panels and efficiency upgrades), cost below average for the area, reduced the home's energy load by 80%,   :o  ;Dand created a house that, to date, makes more power than it uses.(http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif) The Fortunatos plan to use the excess power in the future to charge electric vehicles., which they intend to purchase to replace their gas powered cars.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)The return on investment (ROI) for the 6.5 kilowatts of solar panels, one of the most expensive elements of the retrofit, is approximately 8 years. The home is also healthy, as the Fortunato family made sure to eliminate VOC's, outside pollutants, and other toxins wherever possible.


The Green Idea House has attracted thousands of visitors wanting to learn about the Fortunato's innovative project and how they achieved it. The effort helped inspire the local City of Hermosa Beach to pursue a Carbon Neutral plan, for which the city has received state funding for a feasibility study.

Project Highlights:

• Supports state and city goals (including California's climate legislation AB 32, which aims to curb the state's greenhouse gas emissions)

• Demonstrates cost effectiveness and influences others to reduce energy,  water, waste, toxicity and greenhouse gas emissions

• Provides a case study demonstrating sustainability methods and construction techniques that can be applied to other projects and identifies City codes that are not sustainability-friendly

• Stayed within current building codes and standards to reinforce the feasibility of the average citizen being able to replicate the principles of the project

• Supports local businesses and non-profits by creating partnerships that bridge the gap between good ideas and the opportunity for market transformation

• As a result, the Green Idea House won Los Angeles County’s 2012 Green Leadership Award. (http://dl6.glitter-graphics.net/pub/2752/2752256x4e962185l.gif)

Photo Gallery (Daily Breeze)

Links:www.greenideahouse.com  Hermosa Beach couple's remodel aims to inspire eco-friendly methods: www.dailybreeze.com/ci_20404209/hermosa-beach-couples-remodel-aims-inspire-eco-friendly

http://www.go100percent.org/cms/index.php?id=77&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=207&tx_locator_pi1%5BstartLat%5D=27.20481815&tx_locator_pi1%5BstartLon%5D=-96.9421388
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on November 25, 2014, 09:09:43 pm
World's Largest Motorcycle Manufacturer Opens Garden  ??? Factory  (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif) in India    (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)

SustainableBusiness.com News

You wouldn't expect the world's largest motorcycle manufacturer to have a "garden factory," but Hero Motocorp just opened one of many planned in India.

 Designed by iconic green architectural firm William McDonough + Partners, it demonstrates what they call "Octa-Generation." (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)  That means the building captures or generates eight things: electrical energy, heating, cooling, water from the air, carbon dioxide for rooftop greenhouses, food, jobs on the roof, and air quality for people working in the building. (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif)

It's been awarded LEED-Platinum from the Indian Green Building Council, with the highest scores for any factory. It combines a  1.5 megawatt solar system, extensive daylighting, a green roof and rooftop greenhouses. An interior ‘bio-wall' of vegetation filters indoor air. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-062.gif)
(http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/imageupload/HERO1-final.jpg)
McDonough Hero Factory

"We believe in giving back to the environment as much as we take from it. And that is why Hero has kept the green concept in focus while building this ‘Garden Factory'. As leaders in the automotive industry, we fully realize our responsibility as an opinion leader in the fast changing industrial environment. With the knowledge that a cleaner, pollution-free environment is the only way forward  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)
, we are ushering in an era of change. Today, we are living up to that commitment by unveiling the first of our ‘Green Concept' manufacturing unit which will serve as a template for our upcoming production facilities to replicate," says Pawan Munjal, CEO of Hero MotoCorp. 

McDonough is also leading the design teams for Hero Motocorp's new solar-powered (http://www.nexbay.com/sun_shining_solar_panel_hg_clr.gif) Research & Development Center, which opens next year.
 

(http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/imageupload/HERO2-final.jpg)
McDonough Hero Factory1

 Hero Motocorps parent, Hero Group is involved in many industries, from IT to real estate, and its latest venture is Hero Future Energies, where it plans to develop 1 gigawatt of solar and wind energy by 2017. 

You may know McDonough's work from Ford's Rouge Manufacturing Center - home to the largest green roof in North America -  NASA's net-zero energy and water Sustainability Base - or Method's new factory that's topped by an urban farm  in Chicago. Or you might know them for their cradle-to-cradle certification.

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26026
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 07, 2014, 07:46:55 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l58L3QEVnc&feature=player_embedded

Unique Concept    (http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg)


  This is one of the MOST unique and beautiful tiny living spaces we have seen- and it's made out of a shipping container!

 Measuring only 10 square meters, this little cozy space has it all: a real living room and bedroom (well.. you can't exactly stand up in either but they do the job for sleeping and lounging) a kitchen, office space and a terrific bathroom!

 Creating a comfortable space with 10 square meters to work with is a real accomplishment in itself. This house is also off grid, with solar panels and rainwater collection.

 Way to go Brenda Kelly!


 --Bibi Farber

 This video was produced by www.livingbiginatinyhouse.com
http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/spectacular-off-grid-tiny-shipping-container-house-.html#sthash.236Tb0Dp.dpuf
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 14, 2014, 05:46:37 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW-FRx1Pq2I&feature=player_embedded

Your Home Fits In The Van (http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg)

 
 Welcome to a Yurt, or Ger, an old Mongolian style tent for nomadic populations.

 Boyan and his partner moved into their 21 square meter yurt and they love its simplicity and the freedom it affords them to move with the seasons, or jobs.

 They can be used even in climates with harsh winters, as most yurt companies now make their covers from a reflective insulation developed by NASA, and are designed to withstand winds up to 100 mph. Their round shape makes yurts more efficient to heat than square houses.

 For a basic yurt, prices range from under $5,000 for a twelve foot yurt, to about $10,000 for a thirty footer—not including the many customizations and add-ons that can transform your yurt from rustic to luxurious.

 About 10 minutes in to this video you can see in fast forward motion how the couple dis-assemble and re-assemble the yurt by themselves, all in a single day with no professional tools or skills.  (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif)

 A layer of sheep's wool is actually rolled out around the structure, functioning as one of the most important layers of insulation.

 It's an alternative to a tiny home, at 226 square feet and of course all the space is, well, in one huge space.

 Could you live in a big circular tent with your family?

 "Sometimes I think people like to live in bigger and bigger houses with smaller and smaller families, somehow to hide, not from the outside world, but from themselves." says Boyan. "Here there is nowhere to hide"

 This couple loves it anyway, and this fun, sustainable form of housing is on the rise.

 --Bibi Farber

 This video was produced by Fair Companies
- See more at: http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/the-yurt-a-home-you-can-fold-up-and-move.html#sthash.z59DGGvn.dpuf
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 19, 2014, 12:03:04 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSnRWm7VHv0&feature=player_embedded
Mycelium House  (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif)  (http://dl5.glitter-graphics.net/pub/3328/3328805eipbi6o30e.gif)

Welcome To The Mushroom House! 

By far the most imaginative, sustainable Tiny House design yet!

 Literally, this 64 sq foot house was grown from organic matter, mycelium, which is the vegetative part of a fungus.

 This stuff makes up not just the insulation of the walls, but the structural form of the building.

 It was all grown in one piece, inside the wall cavities that already had wiring and plumbing. The mycelium "knit the wall together", glued the tongue and groove pine boards together. It forms the structure and it's the insulation all at once.

 Not only is it organic matter that is biodegradable, that can be "grown" instead of manufactured- but it comes with other benefits: it has outstanding thermal performance, it's fire resistant, and has no nasty things like VOC's or "aldehydes".

 This is a sustainability fairy tale come true!

 For more info on how to get started on your mycelium tiny house, see www.ecovativedesign.com

 --Bibi Farber

 This video was produced by: CNN Money http://www.ecovativedesign.com/
- See more at: http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/tiny-house-grown-with-mycelium-.html#sthash.xycdOmeF.dpuf
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 19, 2014, 12:33:14 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2dZgYgkofI&feature=player_embedded
You get a LOT of fantastic lighting effects with this house!  (http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 24, 2014, 11:25:47 pm
12/22/2014 02:46 PM     
In Wisconsin, Nation's First Net-Zero Energy Health Complex

SustainableBusiness.com News

In 2009, the Department of Energy announced the launch of the Hospital Energy Alliance, an industry-led partnership to get hospitals on board with energy efficiency and renewables.

 We're seeing the results as more hospitals make announcements like this: a 6.3 megawatt solar system just turned on at New Jersey's CentraState Medical Center - one of the largest distributed energy systems outside of utilities.

KDC Solar owns and installed the system and sells the power to the hospital. There are 21,408 ground-mounted solar panels on 26 acres of land. It's providing electricity to a medical center that serves 14,000 inpatients and 250,000 outpatient visits a year.

In Wisconsin, Gundersen Health System - a network of hospitals, medical clinics and nursing homes - announced they are producing more energy than they consume - the first net-zero energy health system in the US.   ;D

(http://www.healthcaredesignmagazine.com/sites/healthcaredesignmagazine.com/files/imagecache/570x360/Lot_F_Construction0520120611.jpg)

Gundersen Hospital

 They are doing this through a combination of energy sources: biogas from three local farms; methane from a local landfill; wood chips from local suppliers; solar installed on a parking lot; geothermal; and wind from two local projects.

 Energy consumption is down 40%, saving $2 million a year, and they earn another $2 million by selling the electricity and manure byproducts of biogas production. 

"We did not set out to be the greenest health system, we set out to make the air better for our patients to breathe, control our rising energy costs and help our local economy. We believe we have made more progress on all three than anyone else in the country," says CEO Jeff Thompson.

 He notes that hospitals typically consume 2.5 times more energy than commercial buildings, and Wisconsin has one of the most energy-intensive climates in the nation.  They reached these goals even while they built two new hospitals. The cost: $30 million of its own money and $11 million in state and federal grants.

Waste reduction is another big goal in a system that relies on disposal items like syringes and sample cups - 5.9 million tons a year. Hazardous and pharmaceutical waste is down 40%, food waste by 70%, and styrofoam is gone. 

Since Hurricane Sandy, when hospitals were flooded and even the sickest patients had to be evacuated, hospitals are on the front lines to protect themselves from severe weather events.  About 200 hospitals use cogeneration and many are developing microgrids. St. Luke's Hospital in Pennsylvania is pioneering a "farm to hospital" model.

Read our article, Greening Hospitals Would Cut Health Care Costs.

Summaries of some of Gundersen's projects:
Website: www.gundersenenvision.org/gundersen-reaches-first-days-of-energy-independence
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26068

 (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0048.gif) Merry Chrsitmas to all. And to all a good night.

Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on January 06, 2015, 09:35:59 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgdcBOWPYZc&feature=player_embedded
Short Construction time of a carbon neutral home with modular construction technique

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naGAnhax-tI&feature=player_embedded
Hemp Crete Construction is biosphere friendly! (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-060115214934.png) 


(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-060115215039.png) 
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on January 18, 2015, 02:39:44 pm
Solar-Powered Furnace   (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)

The SRCC certified Solar Powered Furnace (SPF) is the industry leading, state of the art, solar air heating system. These patented solar panels are designed and manufactured by RREAL to integrate seamlessly with residential and commercial buildings of all sizes. Made in USA. Patent 8,757,143

(http://www.rreal.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Air-heat-Diagram-21.png)

The fan moves air through the collector(s), where it is heated, and then redistributed to the building using conventional, off-the-shelf, HVAC ducting and air handling equipment.

Check valves prevent reverse thermo-siphoning and uncalled-for heat, so you get clean, free, solar heat only when you want.

Solar air heat is often the most efficient and cost competitive solar technology available in colder climates, saving clients many thousands of dollars and eliminating toxic emissions! (http://elqahera-trading.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dollar-sign-thumbnail1.jpg)


(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180115150229.png)

http://www.rreal.org/solar-powered-furnace/solar-air-heat-basics/

http://www.rreal.org/solar-powered-furnace/

Rural Renewable Energy Alliance (RREAL)

http://www.rreal.org/

Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 12, 2015, 03:10:17 pm
(http://cdn5.triplepundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Belfast-Cohousing-and-Ecovillage.jpg)
Maine Belfast Cohousing and Ecovillage   (http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg)

A Glimpse Inside a Super Energy-Efficient Home (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

 Sarah Lozanova 
 February 12, 2015

One year ago, my family joined Belfast Cohousing & Ecovillage in Midcoast Maine and moved into a high performance house, with triple-pane windows and doors, large south-facing windows, lots of insulation from the slab to the attic, and a metal roof. Our home is heated largely by the sun, appliances and occupants, but a modest heating system is available as needed. Our heating bills are 90 percent less than a typical code-built home in the same climate.

It’s rare to have a house with so many energy-efficient features under the same roof. Many people have been curious about our home and asked numerous questions. These are some of the top questions we’ve received.



(http://themetalart.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/HeatRecoveryFlow.jpg)

I’ve heard of mildew and air-quality problems in super energy efficient homes. Has this been an issue?

I’ve heard some concerning stories about super energy efficient houses without ventilation systems, and the mold and air quality issues that occur. Our home however has a Zehnder heat recovery ventilation system, which constantly supplies fresh air while removing stale air from our kitchen and bathroom. By utlizinging a heat recovery ventilation system, intake air is filtered, removing dust and pollen, then preheated from recycled heat from the exhaust air before it exits our home. Although we can boost the speed of our system with a switch in the bathroom or kitchen, the default mode is sufficient the vast majority of the time and we’ve had no mold or moisture issues in our bathroom and elsewhere.


(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/83/59/1c/83591c58d07d606c5bdc3e072a372779.jpg)

If your house heats itself largely by the sun, appliances, and occupants, won’t it overheat in the summer?

It would seem that a home that stays so warm and cozy in the winter would overheat in the summer, but this is not our experience. Last summer, the house was cooler than the outside temperature on hot days. For additional cooling, we opened the windows when the outside temperatures dipped at night. The heat recovery ventilation system helps maintain cooler indoor temperatures; when it’s warmer outside in the summer, our ventilation system pre-cools the incoming air from the exhaust air.

(http://www.motherearthliving.com/~/media/Images/MEL/Editorial/Blogs/Your%20Natural%20Home/Moon-Light%20jpg.jpg)

Given that Maine has a cold climate, how long is the heating season?

When viewing our home's electric bills, I was struck by how low our energy usage was from April through October. Although we may experience below-freezing temperatures during April and October, our home typically remains in the upper 60s and low 70s, without supplemental heat. We turned our heat on in November and turned it off in March, trimming two months off.



(http://www.earth911.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/DSC02595.jpg)

What is the lighting like in your house?

Because the south-facing living room windows are 5 feet in height, lots of daylight comes into the home. Of course, our north-facing bedrooms get less ldayight. Even during cloudy days, we rarely use lights during the day, especially in the south-facing rooms. When the angle of the sun is lower in the sky during the winter months, sunlight fills the living room and helps keep the winter doldrums away. During the hot summer days, the angle of the sun is higher in the sky and less sunlight enters the home. The only downside to all our south-facing glazing is cleaning all the little fingerprints that appear from my two young children. We also use LED lightbulbs in most of our fixtures to reduce energy use.


(http://cdn5.triplepundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/solar-panel-houses_BCE-300x199.jpg)

What are the heating bills like for your new home?

Our home is all electric, therefore we don’t use wood, propane or natural gas,   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp) and receive only one energy bill. Before we installed a photovoltaic solar system, our largest electric bill was $120 for January for nearly 900 kWh of electricity. The summer electric bills were around $50 for nearly 400 kWh, because we don’t need air conditioning. Now that our home is net-zero and we have a solar system that generates all of our energy over the course of the year, we pay $9.75 monthly for the delivery fee.  (http://www.nexbay.com/sun_shining_solar_panel_hg_clr.gif)  (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif) 


http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2015/02/a-glimpse-inside-a-super-energy-efficient-home-at-belfast-ecovillage


(http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/assets/images/story/2015/2/5/feature-0-1423195124468.jpg)
Main Belfast Cohousing Aerial View
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 19, 2015, 02:44:53 pm
California Taking Significant Steps to Support Clean Energy in Low-Income Housing

Agelbert NOTE: It's better than nothing but the STEPS ARE TINY.  :(

Maria Stamas, NRDC 
 February 19, 2015  |  1 Comments 


California has announced a major new set of initiatives and finalized two agency decisions that will bring increasing amounts of weatherization and solar benefits to low-income residents of affordable multifamily properties, which represent one-third of the state's low-income housing stock.

Until now, this sector has received little attention when it comes to clean energy initiatives in California. But state action over the past few weeks is changing that, which will benefit thousands of Californians living in low-income housing.

Cap-and-trade Funded Low Income Weatherization Program


In mid-January, the Community Services and Development Department finalized guidelines for its single-family and small multifamily low income weatherization program (LIWP). In addition to helping the state meet its greenhouse gas goals to cut dangerous emissions, LIWP will help reduce air pollution, improve public health, and reduce energy bills and water usage--all while stimulating the economy and creating jobs.

Funded through revenues from the state's cap-and-trade auction of the gradually declining amount of permits for the state's largest emitters, a total of $75 million over two years will go directly toward improving the efficiency of households in disadvantaged communities and providing solar photovoltaic panels to eligible homes. Measures are far ranging and go beyond current weatherization programs implemented by utilities through the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). For example, the new program will offer LED lighting; smart power strips; cooling, heating, and hot water replacements; and upgraded windows.

Distinguishing between Small and Large Multifamily Buildings

What may seem like a categorization nuance of these final guidelines is in fact a big deal. In its program, the Community Services and Development Department distinguishes between small and large multi-family dwellings based on whether apartment buildings have individual water heaters and heating/cooling systems (classified as small) or central systems (classified as large).

Why is this important? Previously, low-income energy efficiency programs have tended to neglect properties with central systems, at best, treating only tenants with individual heating or hot water units. As a result, the large multifamily building stock is especially in need of energy savings measures and tenants in these buildings have received far less benefit from weatherization programs.

The Community Services and Development Department is developing a unique pathway for this large multifamily subset of buildings, which will include whole-building audits and corresponding efficiency measures for the building as a whole. These guidelines are under development and are expected to be published in June 2015.

Governor's Partnership with HUD


On January 29, Governor Jerry Brown and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Julian Castro announced a number of actions to expand financing for energy efficiency and solar energy in multifamily housing--following on the heels of the governor's new goal to double the efficiency of California's building stock.

Access to Building-level Data

While many have highlighted the governor's new financing initiatives in partnership with the MacArthur Foundation, HUD, and the U.S. Department of Energy, fewer have emphasized his accompanying commitment to improve access to building level data for owners. Namely, the governor committed the state to
Quote

"obtain and ensure owner access to energy usage data, with appropriate privacy protections, for multi-family buildings and set data standardization and benchmarking efforts to ensure the data that is collected in a way that is accessible and can be used to track progress toward achieving their energy and climate goals."

As building owners currently can't assess even the monthly energy usage of their entire property due to utilities' current interpretation of privacy regulations, this is a most welcome announcement.

MASH Program Extended and Improved

Also on January 29, the California Public Utilities Commission approved $108 million in additional funds for the solar affordable housing programs known as MASH (Multifamily Affordable Solar Housing) and SASH (Single-Family Affordable Homes). Half of these funds, $54 million worth, are allocated to the multifamily sector (via MASH), with a goal of 35 megawatts of installations. Established in 2008, the MASH program offers solar incentives to qualifying affordable multifamily properties. For additional details, see this blog by Everyday Energy or the full decision here.

Groundbreaking Policy Change to Overcome Split Incentives


The decision adopts a unique policy tweak designed to overcome the split incentive between the building owner's investment in solar and the tenants' payment of utility bills. The CPUC approved an enhanced incentive level for solar installations in order to deliver direct tenant benefits on utility bills. The reduction in bills will come through Virtual Net Metering. This added incentive level will, for the first time, ensure that benefits to low-income renters will be equivalent to those of single-family homeowners.

What's Next

These program decisions and new initiatives all demonstrate a growing commitment to cut bills and electricity waste for California's low-income multifamily tenants, while increasing the health and comfort of their homes. For example, improved insulation and furnace repairs or replacements result in reductions in unsafe indoor air particles.

Over the next several months, we can look forward to the CPUC tackling the state's largest low-income energy efficiency program, the Energy Savings Assistance Program. The commission has scheduled a proceeding to set ESAP's direction for at least 2016 and 2017 based on previous commission directives to make significant program enhancements for the multifamily sector. We can also look forward to the Community Services and Development's launch of its large multifamily weatherization program this June.

California's multifamily efficiency milestones represent a growing momentum toward providing more significant energy, financial, and health benefits to affordable multifamily tenants, and in turn, to our climate and environment at large because when smarter energy use leads to reduced electricity consumption we don't need as much polluting fossil fuel generation to make it.

This artice was originally published on NRDC and was republished with permission.

Read More Solar Energy News Here


1 Comments

 A. G. Gelbert   
 February 19, 2015 

This is interesting and positive. However, I am a bit concerned about eligibility requirements and the definition of "Low Income". For example, anyone who lives in a trailer park should NOT have "Income" hoops to jump in order to be eligible.

The so-called Government determined "poverty level" used to "net worth test" people to determine if they are SNAP eligible has been a cruel farce for at least a decade.

Federal money at the SAME rates that Wall Street Bankers get (i.e. about 0.25% interest) for speculation (that does nothing to help this nation's GDP) should be available for individuals for the purpose of absolutely any renewable energy infrastructure installation. And it should be available FIRST in manufactured homes, regardless of arbitrary "poverty level" hoops or SNAP type sleight of government hand to deny or shave benefits if the person has a few thousand dollars in the bank or owns a car, never mind the gamed inflation numbers that keep low balling the "poverty level" to lower and lower levels of desperation.

It is an absolute scandal how the government has shafted the landless poor of this country while it falls all over itself to baby the rich profligate speculators.

The fact that renewable energy has not been backed by an affirmative action program favoring the landless poor (most manufactured home owners and other poor do not own the land their home sits on) is testament to the fact that utilities would lose profits currently extracted from those poor.

What part of "Renewable Energy is good for the nation and the planet" does the government and the Federal Reserve not understand? Or does "Federal Reserve" really mean "Only the Rich Deserve"?

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/02/california-taking-significant-steps-to-support-clean-energy-in-low-income-housing#comment-140039 (http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/02/california-taking-significant-steps-to-support-clean-energy-in-low-income-housing#comment-140039)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 25, 2015, 02:55:55 pm
World’s First Carbon-Positive Prefab Home Hits the Market  ;D

http://ecowatch.com/2015/02/24/archiblox-carbon-positive-prefab-home/
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 27, 2015, 03:08:44 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KNcPq5gQF8&feature=player_embedded
Delivery of, not Carbon Neutral, but CARBON POSITIVE  :o ;D, house.  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-102.gif)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on April 30, 2015, 12:58:27 pm
04/28/2015 03:54 PM       

Stanford Leads With Massive Renewable Energy System


SustainableBusiness.com News

Stanford University announced a massive upgrade to its energy system that makes it a world leader among universities, while saving $420 million on energy costs over the next 35 years.

There are two components - an extremely efficient combined heat and power system (CHP) and lots of solar energy.   (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)

SunPower is installing 5 megawatts (MW) of rooftop solar on campus and a 68 MW project on 300 acres of land - a commitment only exceeded by University of California.  Combined with purchases of renewable energy from the grid, the projects will generate 65% of Stanford's electricity. 

On the efficiency side, Stanford will cut emissions 68% and conserve 15% of potable water through its CHP plant, Stanford Energy Systems Innovations (SESI). An amazing 90% of campus heat will be supplied by recovering waste heat from the system that chills water on campus.

 22 miles of underground pipes had to be replaced and 155 buildings were retrofitted to convert from the old steam cogeneration system that ran on natural gas. Stanford essentially created a District Energy system, common in Europe, but rare in North America.

 Construction started in 2012 and the $438 million project began operating in March.

Stanford patented the software that optimizes the system. It continuously monitors plant equipment, predicts campus energy loads and grid electricity prices, and steers the system to using energy at the most economical times. It also continuously reviews its own performance.

 Stanford says:

"SESI is designed to take advantage of Northern California's temperate climate, although the system is adaptable to nearly any environment. As with most modern large commercial facilities, university buildings are being cooled and heated at the same time throughout the year to supply different room-temperature requirements.

"In other words, the cooling process can be seen as a collection of unwanted heat. Some modern facilities take advantage of this heat overlap on a stand-alone building basis. SESI, however, takes this approach to an entirely new scale, encompassing a 15-million-square-foot campus with a population of more than 30,000.

"By significantly reducing natural gas usage and electrifying the campus heating and cooling system, we enabled the university's energy supply to be substantially transitioned from fossil fuels with volatile and unpredictable long-term prices to clean renewable electricity sources with affordable costs fixed for a very long time," says Joseph Stagner, executive director of Sustainability and Energy Management at Stanford.
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-005.gif)
knocking

Under Stanford's ongoing Energy and Climate Action Plan, new buildings must be 30% more efficient than state code - which already leads the nation. Existing buildings are getting major retrofits and campus programs teach students, faculty and staff how to cut back on their energy use.

Last year, Stanford announced it would divest from coal, the first major university to do so.   ;D

For another innovative use of waste heat, read our article, London Homes Heated By Subway Waste Heat.

Learn more about Stanford's system:

 
Website: http://sustainable.stanford.edu/campus-action/stanford-energy-system-innovations-sesi

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26268

Renewable energy= (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014181553.gif)                                (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif)=Fossil Fuelers
(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-forum/popcorn.gif)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 16, 2015, 08:27:11 pm
Refrigerator Coupling to a Water-Heater and Heating Floor to Save Energy and to Reduce Carbon Emissions

Download Download as PDF (Size:2235KB)  HTML   ePub,  PP. 21-29   
DOI: 10.4236/cweee.2013.21003    2,603 Downloads   10,811 Views   Citations
Author(s)    Leave a comment Romdhane Ben Slama Affiliation(s)

ISSAT Gabes Rue Omar Ibn Khattab, Gabes, Tunisia.

ABSTRACT

With an aim of rationing use of energy, energy safety, and to reduce carbon emission, our interest was geared towards the refrigerators and all the refrigerating machines. Indeed the heat yielded by the exchanger condenser can be developed for the water heating, floors heating etc. After an encouraging theoretical study, two prototypes were produced in order to validate the theoretical results. A first refrigerator was coupled with a water-heater and another with a heating floor. The water temperature reached, in one day, is of 60℃; which makes it possible to predict better results with a continuously used refrigerator.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png) In the same way for the heating floor coupled with the second refrigerator, the temperature reached high values because the surface is reduced; however for the heating floors the standard fixes the temperature between 28℃ and 30℃.


KEYWORDS


Refrigerator, Recuperator, Heating Water, Heating Floor, Heat Pump Cite this paper

Slama, R. (2013) Refrigerator Coupling to a Water-Heater and Heating Floor to Save Energy and to Reduce Carbon Emissions. Computational Water, Energy, and Environmental Engineering, 2, 21-29. doi: 10.4236/cweee.2013.21003.

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=27480
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 26, 2015, 07:01:33 pm
Epic Urban Treehouse Offers Glimpse Into Future Living
Lorraine Chow | March 16, 2015 10:01 am

Did you ever dream of living in a treehouse when you were young? Well, the residents of 25 Verde in Turin, Italy are living out the ultimate childhood fantasy in a breathtaking eco-friendly building enclosed within hundreds of trees.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/25verde2.jpg)
Hundreds of trees and shrubs surround 25 Verde in Turin, Italy, creating a “perfect microclimate” inside the building, architect Luciano Pia said. Photo Credit: Beppe Giardino

Designed by architect Luciano Pia, the five-story structure is held up by rust-colored metal beams made to look like tree trunks and branches.

Potted trees and shrubs of various leaves, colors and flowering are placed on terraces and inside the building to provide shade and reduce noise pollution. There are 150 trees surrounding the building and on the roof and 50 more trees in the courtyard.

As the architect puts it, the building is alive, grows and changes with the seasons. “When all the green is fully blooming it gives the feeling of living in a tree house,” he wrote on his website. “You can dream of a house or live in a dream!”

Deciduous varieties of flora were chosen to filter out the hot summer sun and to allow light to break into the units during winter as the leaves fall from the trees. Like an urban forest, the abundant foliage apparently sucks in 200,000 liters of carbon dioxide an hour, a welcome reprieve from the city’s notorious pollution.

As noted by a local English publication, Turin is one of the most polluted cities within the European Union due to a number of factors including the high concentration of industrial plants, and how it’s situated in the Po Valley, which traps pollution.

The building has several green features. Pia wrote that “one of the aims of the project is the increase of the energetic efficiency, and for this reason several integrated solutions have been adopted: continuous insulation, sun protection, heating and cooling systems which make use of the geothermal energy with heat pumps and recycling of the falling rain to water the green.”

There are a total of 63 residential units in the building. The upper floors have views of a park and the Po river, and the top floor apartments are covered by private green roofs. According to the New York Times, two-thirds of the apartments were sold before construction completed in 2012 at €6,500 per square meter.

The northern Italian city was the site of the 2006 winter olympics and is home to carmaker Fiat. The building sits on some of the auto company’s former offices at the address Via Gabriele Chiabrera, 25, 10126 Torino, Italy.

Check out the Google street view and wander around the area, but first check out these cool images:
(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/25verde4.jpg)
There are potted trees and shrubs of various leaves, colors and flowering throughout the building. Photo Credit: Beppe Giardino

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/25verde6.jpg)
There are 50 trees planted in the court garden. Photo Credit: Beppe Giardino (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/treeswing.gif)
http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/16/urban-treehouse-luciano-pia/
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 03, 2015, 12:01:24 am
Peekaboo House  ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YsKxmw1yyc&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 06, 2015, 03:56:30 pm
France passed law making rooftop solar or gardens mandatory on new commercial buildings  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif)


Quote
Two months ago, France passed a law that requires the rooftops of new commercial buildings to be partially (at least) covered by solar panels  (http://www.nexbay.com/sun_shining_solar_panel_hg_clr.gif)or plants (http://dl5.glitter-graphics.net/pub/3328/3328805eipbi6o30e.gif). The law, passed back in March, was a compromise with French environmentalists and more conservative* members of society.

Details and background here:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/27/1388257/-France-passed-law-making-rooftop-solar-or-gardens-mandatory-on-new-commercial-buildings
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on July 17, 2015, 06:25:19 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-170715174821.jpeg)
Smart Operation for a Low Carbon Energy Region (SOLCER) House

Energy positive :o ;D house: Ecolek Wales Ltd installs Victron Energy equipment in SOLCER House

 
Yesterday was the official opening of Britain’s first affordable ‘energy positive’ house (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg) , which uses Victron Energy equipment, installed by Ecolek Wales Ltd.

The SOLCER House as it is known, has been designed to produce more energy than it consumes. SOLCER stands for ‘Smart Operation for a Low Carbon Energy Region’. The region in this instance is in Wales. The house was designed and constructed by the Welsh School of Architecture at Cardiff University. Dr. Jo Patterson who is a research fellow there was the also the project manager for this build. Ester Coma-Bassas a research assistant was the architect. The house has three bedrooms and costs around £1,000 m2 to construct which means it falls within the affordable social housing range. A great achievement in itself, besides the low carbon and energy positive aspects.

This low carbon house uses a Victron Energy 6.9kWh battery storage system, a Quattro Inverter/Charger, BlueSolar MPPT solar charge controllers and a Colour Control GX for onsite monitoring, plus the Victron Remote Management (VRM) site for offsite system monitoring of its energy systems. All equipment has been specified and installed by Ecolek Wales Ltd.

(http://www.victronenergy.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Ecolek.jpg)

Here is what project manager, Dr. Jo Patterson, had to say about the installation:

“Ecolek have been very professional in their approach to working on this novel research project. They have made a number of informed suggestions to enhance the battery system that was originally planned and have been highly proactive in completing the project on time and to a very high standard. They have collaborated well with all of the team involved in the build and have been a pleasure to work with”.

Victron Energy equipment installed
•2 x Li-ion Battery Tower
•8 x Lithium 12.8 V batteries
•1 x VE.Bus BMS
•1 x 24/5000/120-100/100 Quattro
•2 x BlueSolar MPPT 150/70
•1 x Color Control GX


Agelbert NOTE: Links to each of the above components with graphics and details are all in the  original post (http://www.victronenergy.com/blog/2015/07/17/energy-positive-house-ecolek-wales-ltd-installs-victron-energy-equipment-in-solcer-house/).

In the press

Quite clearly, going by the amount of national UK press that has been generated recently, this is certainly a very well thought of project. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif) Rather than go into detail here to learn more, it makes more sense to direct you to the following:
For an explanation of the build here is a YouTube video from Cardiff University: https://youtu.be/Kgi4S89AVgY

For an explanation by Ecolek for their part of the project, see from 3 mins 54 secs at: https://youtu.be/VHBsWk8_QaY


The Guardian article: Britain’s first ‘energy positive’ house opens in Wales

BBC News (Science & Environment) article: Designers create the ‘impossible’ zero-carbon house

Twitter: @LowCarbon_HOUSE

Credits

Thanks to Ian Hewson of Ecolek Wales for making us aware of this project.

Thanks to Cardiff University for the images used.

John Rushworth
http://www.victronenergy.com/blog/2015/07/17/energy-positive-house-ecolek-wales-ltd-installs-victron-energy-equipment-in-solcer-house/




Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on July 20, 2015, 08:30:10 pm
People and Planet Benefit From ‘Green’ Buildings

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/people_and_planet_benefit_from_green_buildings_20150719
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on July 30, 2015, 06:08:03 pm
Jul 28, 2015 Rocky Mountain Institute

Author David Labrador

Teaching the Arithmetic of Deep Retrofit Value

RMI and the Institute of Real Estate Management partner with new online courses

Does it make business sense to do a deep energy retrofit on a commercial building? Many investors currently overlook the retrofit’s value beyond its energy cost savings, but now their asset managers will be able to do a more complete calculation and paint a fuller picture of a retrofit’s value. Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) and the Institute of Real Estate Management (IREM) have partnered to create a series of online courses that debuted this month. Known as the Analyzing and Presenting Deep Retrofit Value series, they teach the analytical skills needed to calculate and report on the value beyond energy savings of potential deep retrofits of buildings. The courses are based on RMI’s report How To Calculate and Present Deep Retrofit Value: A Guide for Investors and are offered to IREM’s membership of more than 18,000 property managers, as well as the public.

Deep energy retrofits employ an integrated array of energy efficiency measures to reduce energy consumption by 30 percent or more compared to pre-retrofit energy use. They deliver other non-energy benefits, too, yet “lots of organizations still don’t prioritize these metrics in their decision-making process,” says Douglas Miller, a senior associate at RMI and coauthor of the Guide for Investors report. Energy and sustainability retrofits are almost exclusively evaluated by the simple payback provided solely by the energy costs savings, and must meet a very high return rate of 30 percent or more to be considered an attractive investment. “Deep retrofits rarely can meet this financial hurdle rate based on energy cost savings alone,” says Michael Bendewald, a manager on RMI’s buildings team and coauthor of the Guide for Investors report.

Value Beyond Energy—And Beyond Sustainability

However, there is serious economic value in deep retrofits that extends well beyond the simple payback of energy efficiency measures. “Yes, a more-energy-efficient building uses less energy and is less costly to run,” says Bendewald, “and the low-cost attributes of the building can translate to increased income and sales price.” What is less well known is this latter—usually much bigger—form of value, which can be derived from low building-energy costs as well as improved tenant satisfaction and other factors. “Sustainable buildings—primarily energy-efficient ones—deliver more value to those who occupy, own, or invest in the buildings than just lower energy bills,” Miller says, “and that’s the bigger story.”

The report explores four additional values that deep retrofits can realize for investors: 1) increase the sale price of a property, 2) increase rents, 3) reduce non-energy operating costs, and 4) even reduce development costs when combined with other, needed renovations. A fifth valuable dimension of a retrofit process is a risk analysis that maximizes the value of the other elements. “When we say ‘additional value,’ this is not a reference to traditional externalities such as carbon reductions or public health,” says Miller. “It’s about how you can charge higher rent, or how you can sell the property for more, or how you’re likely to have more occupied space in the building.” In other words, values that are intrinsic to a company’s finances and have simply been left out of the math—but they shouldn’t be.

But how to turn these underemphasized value opportunities into common knowledge? The Guide for Investors report “provides the research demonstrating that this additional value is there and highlights examples of those value elements being considered out in the market,” says Miller.

But the report alone cannot move the vast U.S. real estate market. That’s where IREM’s course series comes in. IREM members manage 13 billion square feet of property worth about $800 billion. And when it comes to forging a low-carbon future in the U.S., says Bendewald, “improving the energy efficiency of existing buildings is critical.” IREM is used to educating its members. “They provide a lot of good, quality education,” says Bendewald. “They’re able to take our content, our thought leadership, and convert it into a curriculum.”

Finding Value Step by Step

“The courses take the extensive research on the multiple value streams that result from deep retrofits and put this body of work into a practical guide to enable investors to make smarter decisions,” says Iain Campbell, managing director of the buildings practice at RMI. Fundamentally, the online courses show how to quantify and demonstrate the potential value of deep retrofit projects. “We want real estate investment professionals to have those analytical abilities to evaluate these projects and how they might contribute to a property’s value,” says IREM’s sustainability program manager, Todd Feist. RMI’s Guide for Investors report and IREM’s membership “seemed like the perfect match,” Feist says. “It seemed like they were already putting that content together for our audience.” The courses take professionals through the process of valuing projects step by step.

Much of the added value of deep retrofits stems from increasing regulations for energy-performance improvements and from the fact that, in many markets, “people are willing to spend more for a better property,” says Miller. These factors vary from place to place. “Sustainability is very market-specific, especially the degree to which you can capture the financial benefits,” says Feist. “But it’s becoming increasingly common for investors and tenants to value and demand sustainability and energy efficiency.” Furthermore, Feist says, “markets change quickly, regulations pass quickly.” He advises property managers that “all of a sudden you may get an email from a tenant that says ‘Hey, what are you doing on sustainability in this building?’”

Because local buyers and renters of space value sustainability so differently, the first step is market research. “The deep retrofit methodology outlined by RMI and taught in the courses provides a reliable and repeatable framework for assessing that demand from investors and tenants,” says Feist. “Once you do that qualitative analysis, the preliminary analysis of the context for the deep retrofit project and sustainability in your market,” he says, “you can move into analyzing each of the five value elements that potentially contribute to adding to the value of a property.”

Finding these value elements is key for anyone thinking about investing in an efficient building. According to Miller, the courses will allow property managers to say, “‘this will help reduce risk associated with the building’ or ‘we can charge a higher rent with this’ or ‘we can have office space be vacant for a shorter amount of time.’” The final step, says Feist, “would be a deep retrofit value report, which is the presentation to your decision-makers and stakeholders on the potential deep retrofit projects.”

A Toolbox for Investors


There will be three courses that progress in detail on the deep-retrofit-value methodology. One is already live and the others will be released in the coming weeks, into early fall. Bendewald explains: "The first course introduces the main topics of how to think about the full value proposition from deep retrofits or super-efficiency in buildings in general. The second course goes into a little bit more detail on how you make the calculations and more advice on how to build a business case.”

Finally, says Bendewald, “the third course is actually geared toward asset managers, the people who are operating at the portfolio level, so that third course includes a tool to start to incorporate these different values into your capital allocation process.” Feist adds: “It walks the learner through a discounted cash flow analysis using a spreadsheet tool that analyzes how a deep retrofit project will contribute to the net present value of a real estate asset.”

These courses meet a core need of IREM’s members. “If you work for a real estate services firm and you work with clients, your duty is to make sure that you’re doing everything possible to increase the value of their assets,” says Feist, “and sustainability and these deep retrofits are another tool, a powerful tool, in your toolbox to fulfill your client’s goals.” Bendewald explains: “If you reduce costs and you maintain your revenues—that equates directly to improving the fundamental economics of that building.”

For RMI, says Miller, the key is that the courses “help people reveal the additional value of investments in sustainable buildings.” That value “is largely excluded from decision making and, as a result, is leading to less investment in sustainable buildings than would happen were people to value it properly.” When investors decide to pursue deep retrofits, says Miller, “the resulting energy use reductions lead directly to carbon emissions savings.”

For IREM’s members, the courses are important because it gives them the edge over the competition, no matter where they operate. “The deep retrofit methodology will allow you to understand sustainability and building improvements more thoroughly and give you analytical skills that have value in any market,” Feist says. Campbell emphasizes this point by saying “professionals working in this space really need to know about this.” Miller is delighted that the course series is under way. “I think the courses are powerful because they show how to enhance the case for deep retrofits in terms that resonate with investors.”

http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2015_07_28_the_arithmetic_of_deep_retrofit_value
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on August 10, 2015, 07:58:38 pm

Gorgeous Solar Powered Off Grid Shipping Container Cabin For $58k   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191456.bmp)


Jun 8, 2015 by Off Grid World
   
Solar powered off grid shipping container home is 355 square feet of off grid splendor. Canadian builder Joseph Dupuis works at Algonquin College in Ottawa as a researcher on renewable energy. He built this solar powered masterpiece and lives in it. Oh, and it’s for sale too! You could own it for $58k plus shipping.

Great pictures and full description:
https://www.offgridworld.com/gorgeous-solar-powered-off-grid-shipping-container-cabin-for-58k/

Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on October 28, 2015, 07:27:04 pm
https://youtu.be/WMNzoWkXTtc

Eco Dome - Earth As Shelter    (http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg)

Quote
Amazing: a pile of earth, dug out from a building site, can be turned into a small house called an Eco- Dome.

 The folks at the California Institute of Earth Art and Architecture teach professionals and students from all over the world how to build structures like this.

 This Superadobe technology was first presented to NASA for lunar habitats, and can build single or clustered homes on earth which are resistant to fire, floods, wind storms and earthquakes. Long sandbag tubes are filled with earth and compacted in layers which are reinforced and connected with barbed wire.

 The man you see narrating in this clip is architect and author Nader Khalili who developed the simple breakthrough building technology with the freely available material of earth, for almost thirty years.

 Nader Khalili passed in 2008 but has inspired a global movement and left a rich body of philosophy, design and innovative construction technology. His work is continued at Cal-Earth Institute, as the basis for its research and educational mission.

 --Bibi Farber

 This video was produced by Cal- Earth. - See more at: http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/eco-dome.html#sthash.SLeJVcI1.dpuf (http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/eco-dome.html#sthash.SLeJVcI1.dpuf)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 23, 2015, 07:41:08 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7Vp0DJrBm8&feature=player_embedded

World’s First Off-Grid EcoCapsule Runs Entirely on Renewable Energy  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)
Cole Mellino | December 22, 2015 10:03 am

After much anticipation, the egg-shaped EcoCapsule is finally available for pre-order earlier this month. The oblong home, which costs €79,000 (about $85,688) per unit, runs entirely on renewables.

The 88-square feet of interior space may seem pretty small, but it packs in all the necessities—plenty of storage, a shower, composting toilet, stove, sink, table and couch that converts into a double bed.

The home comes with a 600-watt rooftop solar system and a low-noise wind turbine that can deliver up to 750 watts. It’s 10-kilowatt-hour battery capacity is expected to last at least four days.

With four wheels and hooks on top for ease of transport, the EcoCapsule can be taken almost anywhere. Its curved roof maximizes energy efficiency and rainwater capture, which can be filtered for human consumption.

 home is designed by Slovakian group Nice Architects. The group, which unveiled a prototype in May, told CNN they were blown away by the demand for their product. By July, they already had thousands of pre-orders.

Currently, it’s available for sale in the European Union, U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. And it meets all of the safety regulations for each of those countries. The estimated delivery date for the first generation of EcoCapsules is late 2016 to early 2017. For those with sticker shock, the designers say the price will drop in the coming years as production is scaled and costs decrease.

Check out these fascinating visuals from the company:



Eighty-eight square feet of interior space may sound small, but the inside looks much more spacious than you might think.  ;D Photo credit (at link): Martin Barabas/EcoCapsule


http://ecowatch.com/2015/12/22/off-grid-ecocapsule/
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on December 26, 2015, 10:54:43 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfsfFtdgGJI&feature=player_embedded

World’s First Solar-Hydrogen Residential Development Is 100% Self-Sustaining
  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/za4.gif) (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)


Lorraine Chow | December 23, 2015 10:53 am

http://ecowatch.com/2015/12/23/solar-hydrogen-homes/
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 07, 2016, 01:32:17 am
https://youtu.be/BNmjwBPLB2c
Off the grid without leaving the neighborhood Heat, hot water, AC and car fuel - from the sun    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191456.bmp)

http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/low-tech---high-impact/off-the-grid-without-leaving-the-neighborhood.html#sthash.ileXaJ23.dpuf
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 25, 2016, 06:35:23 pm
"Earth Turns to Gold in the Hands of the Wise"  (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

https://youtu.be/WMNzoWkXTtc

http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/eco-dome.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on April 26, 2016, 07:15:45 pm
(https://media.licdn.com/media/p/6/005/088/13b/37cffed.png)
Alaska SeaLife Center replaces fossil fuels with sea water power  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)

April 25, 2016

Megan Treacy (@mtreacy) Technology / Clean Technology 

Located in Seward, Alaska about 125 miles south of Anchorage, the Alaska SeaLife Center does important work researching and promoting awareness of the wildlife that resides along the coast of Alaska. The center serves as an aquarium, but also operates as a marine research center and wildlife rescue and rehabilitation center.

The size of the center and its location so far north meant that it has required several electric and oil-fired boilers to heat the buildings. Back in 2011, the center decided to take advantage of a resource right outside its doors and try to cut down on its reliance on fossil fuels and save some money in the process. The center began building a heat pump system that uses energy from the sea water in Resurrection Bay.

The heat pump system was initially effective enough to cover hot water heating and radiant floor heating, but they were still relying on the boilers for baseboard heating. In December, they added a new, much more effective system and the center now meets 98 percent of the its heating needs through renewable energy and has eliminated the use of most of the boilers.

Resurrection Bay is more than 900 feet deep. Through the summer, the water in the bay absorbs solar heat that warms the water through October. The water below the surface remains warmer than the air temperature through winter, which means the bay acts as a sort of heat storage. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)

sealife center heat pump tech (graphic at link)
© Alaska SeaLife Center

In the new system, seawater is pumped through a heat exchanger, which warms a water and glycol mix. (Seawater is corrosive, and it would freeze, so the glycol antifreeze is needed.) When liquid refrigerant (in this case CO2) comes in contact with the warmish water, it evaporates, which pulls heat out of the water the way melting ice pulls heat out of your drink – changing from a liquid to a gas absorbs energy.

The CO2 then is compressed to 2000 PSI, which raises its temperature to 194°. The hot compressed gas then goes to a condenser, where it turns into a liquid, releasing all the heat that it had stored when it was turned into a vapor.

The old system used a synthetic refrigerant that was not only less effective, but also posed a greenhouse gas risk if they were to leak from the system. The carbon dioxide refrigerant also poses a risk, but to a much lesser degree and the amount of fossil fuel use it's offsetting is significant  ;D. The center estimates that with the new system they are avoiding 1.24 million pounds of carbon emissions.

The SeaLife Center is saving $15,000 a month in heating costs, a savings that can be redirected to its conservation and research programs.

Quote
The system will have a complete return on investment in only 13 years. (http://elqahera-trading.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dollar-sign-thumbnail1.jpg)   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)

The center hopes this shows the potential for this type of heating system throughout the state of Alaska, which has more coastline than the rest of the country put together.

http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/alaska-sealife-center-replaces-fossil-fuels-sea-water-power.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 09, 2016, 07:44:33 pm
The Phononic solid state heating and cooling revolution is almost here  ;D

Lloyd Alter (@lloydalter)
Design / Green Architecture
 May 9, 2016

SNIPPET:

Solid state cooling devices have been around for centuries, since the Peltier effect was discovered. They are often used in CPU coolers and even tiny iceboxes, but are not very efficient. Phononic has significantly improved on them; as can be seen in the video of their little fridge below, they have integrated the basic chip with heat transfer systems that appear to make it work better.

https://youtu.be/RbgGvd9yjes (https://youtu.be/RbgGvd9yjes)

It is a road map familiar to those who watched the development of LEDs, which were first rolled out as replacements for things we already knew and understood, like light bulbs and fluorescent tubes in computer monitors and TVs. Now LEDs are everywhere and in everything.


Similarly, Phononic is now working with the world’s largest appliance maker   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp), Haier, starting with high performance wine chillers, delivering smaller units with more accurate temperature control and lower power consumption. They are now branching into residential refrigerators in Europe and Asia, (where we have noted that small fridges make good cities). With Haier’s acquisition of GE’s appliance division, no doubt totally silent fridges without compressors will be arriving here soon too.

Solid state fridges have a lot more room inside because the compressor is gone; solid state heat pumps could heat and cool while taking up almost no space.

However the revolution this will cause in multifamily housing is going to be even more significant. Currently most apartments are heated and cooled by a vertical fan coil or heat pump units in the corner of a room, with ductwork running under the ceiling to the other rooms. Or they have noisy, inefficient through wall heat pump units that are very high maintenance. Imagine replacing all of that with a solid state heat pump with no moving parts, a heating and cooling panel on the wall in each room delivering what is needed when it is needed. They might well be built into the floors for radiant heating and cooling. This could make the design, operation and maintenance of multifamily buildings so much easier.

And of course, getting rid of compressors also means getting rid of refrigerants, which leak and which have serious global warming potential. Another problem gone with solid state heating and cooling.

I do not think I am overstating the case when I suggest that just as the transistor revolutionized electronics, and the LED is in the process of transforming lighting, Solid state thermoelectrics are going to revolutionize heating and cooling. Since the form of our homes and buildings has always been a function of how they are heated and cooled, it might we change that as well.

in 2014 I thought we were on the verge of a cooling revolution; now I think it is even bigger than that. It is a cooling, heating and design revolution.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280416145345.jpeg)

http://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/year-could-see-real-revolution-they-way-we-do-heating-and-cooling.html (http://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/year-could-see-real-revolution-they-way-we-do-heating-and-cooling.html)

Agelbert NOTE: For those that live in the reality based community (fossil fuel industry defending wishful thinkers wouldn't know reality if it bit them in the ass), the solid state heat pump technology will knock out fully 75%, on the average, of energy DEMAND from an average home. That MEANS that the solar panel input can then be used to power a HIGHER PERCENTAGE of the home AND ALSO make MORE RENEWABLE ENERGY JUICE available to charge EVs and supplement grid power.

For those who are not following where this inevitably leads, just look at Energy use stats for ALL the homes in the USA now in BPD (barrels per day). THEN subtract 75% of that...

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-090516210717.png)

Renewable energy= (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014181553.gif)                                (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif)=Fossil Fuelers

(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-forum/popcorn.gif)

Quote
"Hitting peak oil will come faster than any of us think. But don't blame dwindling supply — it's all about disappearing demand" Amory Lovins


Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 27, 2016, 09:00:29 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/527210744178167809/z6CbCdS5.jpeg)


May 18, 2016

Authors Mark Dyson
ManagerEdison Almeida

The Business Value of Demand Flexibility

In this digital age, electricity is the lifeblood of our society. After any major disruptive event, the top priority is to restore electric power service. Without power we lack heat, air conditioning, communications, financial services, and access to the Internet, pretty much sending us back to the Stone Age.

But who can afford building more electric power capacity? There are over one billion kilowatts of installed power capacity in the U.S. At such a large scale, increasing capacity even by a few percentage points is very expensive. Experts have forecast the need for $1.4 trillion of investment through 2030 to meet growing demand and replace aging infrastructure in the U.S. alone.

Fortunately, in today’s Internet-connected world, we can take a lower-cost approach, similar to the method that telecom, cable, and Internet companies have been using for decades to manage peak demand on their networks. Instead of building redundant capacity for each user, these networks intelligently manage both demand and supply.

Now, it’s possible to apply the same logic to energy demands: software can help lower coincidental demand peaks for a business using the same proven “queuing” approach as other networked industries. And at scale across thousands of buildings, this building-level demand flexibility can help lower peak demand for the grid, saving all customers the cost of building new power plants.

Peak demand drives high costs for the grid and businesses

Although the grid rarely uses 100 percent of electric power capacity, power plants to provide that capacity must be in place when needed. Currently, the average capacity utilization of the American electric grid is only about 55 percent, and it’s getting worse as peak demand rises while total sales fall. This means that about half the time, on average, power plants are sitting idle.

What causes this? Many homes and businesses don’t use much energy all the time, but when a thermostat’s mercury spikes, demand soars. Analysis of the electricity bill data of several major retailers and telecom companies reveals a pervasive trait: just four percent of their total energy use drives about 40 percent of their total peak demand. In other words, a tiny amount of energy use, occurring at the peak hours and largely driven by air conditioning, requires a lot of capacity that isn’t needed during the other hours of the year.

Why does this happen? Many common loads, including typical air conditioners, motors, pumps, charging stations, heaters, and others, often happen to turn on at the same time, creating coincidental energy peaks. This increases costs for the utility, which must have available capacity to meet these peaks.

In order to address this phenomenon, utilities typically impose “demand charges” on commercial and industrial customers, meaning that the customer pays each month for the maximum power demand at their meter during any given interval. These charges, combined with the “peakiness” of typical commercial loads, mean that only four percent of a business’s energy use drives 40 percent of the monthly demand charges a business must pay. With typical demand charges of $5–15 per peak kW per month, this peak energy can drive additional costs on the order of thousands of dollars per building per year.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270516205023.png)

For business customers, demand charges can comprise up to 40 percent of their utility bills, and these costs are on the rise. For example, there have been dramatic demand-rate increases of over 50 percent in the past five years in the PG&E service area in California. As utilities around the country grapple with new rate designs to better reflect system costs, it is likely that managing demand charges will become even more important.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270516205313.png)
Source: The Brattle Group


New opportunities to manage demand charges

Traditionally, limiting demand charges has not been an easy problem to solve, and most executives have treated electricity costs as a “must-pay” expense.

Fortunately, in today’s IT-driven world, it is increasingly easy for businesses to effectively manage growing peak energy demand costs. By unlocking the potential of demand flexibility, businesses can use software services to manage peak demand and achieve significant savings on their monthly bills at scale.

One approach to unlocking the value of demand flexibility is by queuing connected loads using low-cost computer systems. In other words, it’s possible to keep these loads from all turning on at the same time and creating very expensive and unnecessary coincidental energy peaks by simply using a software upgrade.

Consider how network companies (phone, internet, and cable) manage peak demand on their networks. Whenever you place a call on your cell phone, click the button to watch a digital video, or push the send button of your email, you do not connect immediately; rather, your request is placed into a queue, and the system defines the optimum time for connection while still meeting your needs for timely service.

The same logic works for electricity loads: software can help manage demand variations with small adjustments that can add up to shrink the peak. With these methods, energy delivery is usually delayed for only a matter of seconds. For loads like air conditioners, this is practically imperceptible; temperatures don’t rise appreciably in the time it takes for energy to be queued, but peak demand can be lowered dramatically.


Benefits for businesses and the grid

With falling computer costs and rising demand charges, lowering peak demand can pay off very quickly for a business—sometimes in less than a year. Lowering peak demand also creates value for the grid; RMI’s recent analysis found a potential for $13 billion per year in savings for the grid, from just a few smart appliances in each household in the country. The savings potential for commercial and industrial buildings is likely just as large.

Today’s $300 billion per year electricity industry leaves about half of its available capacity idle, increasing costs for all customers.    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp)

Business-led demand flexibility approaches can save companies money while dramatically improving the utilization of our trillion-dollar grid, leading to savings for all of us.    (http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg)

Edison Almeida (@almeidaed) is the founder and CEO of eCurv, Inc.

http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2016_05_18_the_business_value_of_demand_flexibility
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 11, 2016, 05:54:52 pm
Apple Is Generating So Much Renewable Energy It Plans to Start Selling It  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)

Lorraine Chow | June 11, 2016 10:52 am

Apple is seeking to sell a whole different product. No, not cars—yet. Try renewable energy. The iPhone maker has created an energy subsidiary in Delaware called Apple Energy LLC to sell surplus electricity generated by its various renewable energy projects.

Documents seen by PV Tech show that Apple has applied to the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to sell excess power from solar panels on top of its Cupertino, California headquarters as well as energy generated by its solar farms, hydroelectric plants and biogas facilities across the country.

This is big news. Most corporations usually sell surplus energy to power companies, but the tech titan is basically creating a green energy pipeline to consumers.

“If Apple’s application is approved, it will be able to sell electricity directly to its customers—eliminating the need for utility power,” PV Tech observed.

In the FERC filing, Apple has requested to sell energy at market rates rather than wholesale since it’s not an major energy company and cannot influence electricity prices, PV Tech noted.

“Applicant seeks the same blanket authorization and waivers of the commission’s rules and filing requirements previously granted to other entities authorized to transact at market-based rates,” Apple’s tariff states.

The Apple blog 9to5Mac suspects that Apple’s FERC filing is following in the footsteps of Green Mountain Power, which also sells renewable energy to homeowners. Another guess is that Apple’s potential new energy company could help fuel Apple’s long-rumored electric car project.

Apple has requested the tariff be granted within 60 days of its June 6 filing, so we’ll have to wait until then to see if it takes off.

In recent years, Apple has worked hard to shrink its global carbon footprint, and CEO Tim Cook is known for being a green leader.

“Climate change is one of the great challenges of our time, and the time for action is now,” Cook said. “The transition to a new green economy requires innovation, ambition and purpose.”

The company boasts that all its data centers and most of its stores and corporate offices are now powered by green, renewable energy. Apple has plans for 521 megawatts of solar projects globally, as well as other investments in hydroelectric, biogas and geothermal power, which generates enough power to cover 93 percent of its worldwide energy usage. The company wants to eventually operate with 100 percent renewable energy.

http://ecowatch.com/2016/06/11/apple-sell-renewable-energy/

Agelbert NOTE: This should be interesting. FERC has always defended the fossil fuel industry and utility energy slanted (i.e. monopolistic) playing field.

But FERC has always been for sale to the highest bidder. Apple has a lot of money = influence.

Apple, seeing a very profitable opportunity to outcompete some ossified business models among the utilities, is going to get in on the utility energy market share with Renewable Energy, after they "convince" the appropriate officials at FERC to drop the fossil fuel friendly road blocks, of course.

Any port in the global warming storm, I always say.  ;)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 11, 2016, 07:58:44 pm
World’s First Large-Scale Carbon-Neutral Brewery Now in Operation  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2.gif)

Lorraine Chow | June 10, 2016 11:57 am

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/heineken_brew_750_2.jpg)
Heineken's brewery in Austria has achieved its goal of becoming the first CO2 neutral brewery of its scale in the world. Photo credit: Heineken

The facility, which kicked off its green upgrades back in 2003, has now met 100 percent of its energy needs via clean power sources including hydropower, solar thermal energy from a 1,500-square-meter photovoltaic array and biomass district heating, in which 40 percent of the brewery’s heat requirements comes from surplus heat discharged from a neighboring sawmill.

The site is also incredibly savvy with waste. It hosts its own grain fermentation plant that converts production waste into biogas—the first plant of its kind a major brewery. The grain fermentation plant converts 18,000 tons of the brewer’s grains, filter residues and other byproducts from beer-making process into biogas annually. Residues from the fermentation plant are used as fertilizer.

https://youtu.be/bWmd1psRNm4 (https://youtu.be/bWmd1psRNm4)
[

Here are some other eco-friendly strides the brewery—a finalist for the 2016 European Union Sustainable Energy Award—has achieved:


•Ninety percent of the waste heat generated in the brewing process is used to heat water

•A new type of boiling system is used during the brewing process, which helps to save electricity and water

•Energy generated from brewery residues will be used to generate steam and any excess volumes will be converted into electric current

•100 percent of raw materials used at the Göss Brewery come from Austria


As Inhabitat reported, the brewery’s operations will cut carbon emissions from approximately 3,000 tonnes a year to zero.

“Through a combination of innovative technology, creative thinking and partnerships with our local community, we have turned a heritage brewery into the world’s first major zero carbon brewery,” Göss brew master Andreas Werner told the publication.

“Our Göss brewery may be in a small town but our goal was to make a big impact. I am proud of what we have achieved for the Heineken Company and want to help our other breweries, and the wider brewing industry, make renewable energy part of their energy mix, just as we have done.”

62747_Goss_Brewery_Infographic_02_271015 (graphic at article link)

The Göss Brewery’s zero carbon status is only one example of Heineken’s overall environmental goals. According to a blog post from Michael Dickstein, Heineken’s global director of sustainable development, the beer-maker is now the world’s largest user of solar energy in beer production.

The company’s Brewed by the Sun campaign boasts a number of solar achievements including:

•100,000 glasses of Wieckse beer brewed through solar energy at the Den Bosch brewery in the south of the Netherlands

•Birra Morretti Baffo d’Oro is brewed with 100 percent Italian malted barley and 100 percent Italian sun

•The company’s rooftop solar installation in Singapore, which brews the local Tiger beer, is the size of three football pitches


Heineken, the world’s third-largest brewer, is aiming to slash 40 percent of carbon emissions from global productions by 2020 through its Brewing a Better Future strategy.

The beer brewing industry is not immune to the effects of climate change. In the U.S., the ever-changing environment is a threat to the domestic beer market, as Ceres wrote:

Warmer temperatures and extreme weather events are harming the production of hops, a critical ingredient of beer that grows primarily in the Pacific Northwest. Rising demand and lower yields have driven the price of hops up by more than 250 percent over the past decade. Clean water resources, another key ingredient, are also becoming scarcer in the West as a result of climate-related droughts and reduced snow pack.

Several U.S. breweries have integrated sustainability into their business practices such as investing in renewable energy, energy efficiency, water efficiency, waste recapture and sustainable sourcing in order to reduce their environmental footprint.

http://ecowatch.com/2016/06/10/heineken-carbon-neutral-brewery/ (http://ecowatch.com/2016/06/10/heineken-carbon-neutral-brewery/)

Agelbert NOTE: Expect some fossil fuel loving hairsplitter to show up to yammer about fossil fuel powered tractors and other farm equipment used to grow the beer ingredients giving the alleged "lie" to this story.

The fact is that ALL farm machinery can be run on ethanol Renewable Energy biofuels, never mind the fact that EV farm machinery is perfectly feasible due to the ease of harvesting solar and wind energy on the farm to charge farm machinery (which does not have to move very far at all) batteries in a sustainable and renewable fashion.

But those "details" are somehow always "forgotten" by the fossil fuelers...  ::)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 12, 2016, 01:01:38 am
Quote
But those "details" are somehow always "forgotten" by the fossil fuelers... 

Some details are also forgotten by those besotted by Renewables - like the infrastructure's embedded energy.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-010215143525.png)  The factory, the solar panels, the tractors (which are basically a diesel engine with wheels bolted on and CAN'T be electrified), the transport infrastructure (trucks and roads), the retail shops, the vehicles to get to the shops and back.   For some of those items, you would only count a proportion of the energy towards the energy budget of beer, obviously.
(http://williamsburgsoftball.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/forest-for-trees.jpg)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-090315203150.png)

(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif)

Palloy,
the hairsplitting, snark infested, sarcastic mocker of anything that smacks of a solution to our planetary crisis ARRIVES.  ::) Your, "all Renewable Energy has a large fossil fuel energy component", therefore Renewable Energy is not a solution" purist bullshit is BORING, unrealistic,  tiresome and irrelevant to the world's energy demand SOLUTION, WHICH IS the ongoing transition to 100% Renewable Energy.

I wish to point out, ONCE AGAIN, how ALL that infrastructure you mentioned CAN and DOES run quite well on 100% PLUS Renewable Energy, even if most of it does not now BECAUSE your beloved fossil fuel Fascists have consistently gamed the energy source and use market with laws and subsidy THEFT. 

SNIPPET from an article by Bill Ritter, Colorado’s 41st governor.

Fossil fuels enjoy a variety of targeted tax benefits as well as MLPs. Denying the same mix to renewable energy investors perpetuates federal policies that have long picked fossil fuels as the winners. The PTC/ITC and MLPs should not be an either/or issue.

Bill Ritter served as Colorado’s 41st governor. He is currently the director of the Center for the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University.

http://blogs.wsj.com/experts/2014/09/30/lets-even-the-playing-field-for-renewable-energy/Negative (http://blogs.wsj.com/experts/2014/09/30/lets-even-the-playing-field-for-renewable-energy/Negative)

There is too much fossil fuel industry corruption in, and collusion with, our government. The fact is that fossil fuel industry has succeeded in getting EIA to the absurdly ridiculous conclusion that pushing "natural" (i.e. FRACKED) gas is in the "Public" (see: Fossil fuel Corporate Profits) Interest.

If the "Public Interest" by Federal Agencies was not being equated to JOB SECURITY INTEREST for the fossil fuel industry, then the allegations from the EIA that "natural" gas power plants are "cheaper" to build and have greater "capacity" than renewable power generation from wind would be summarily dismissed as contrived numbers gaming.

The EIA, like the EPA and FERC, continue to cherry pick thermodynamic science and energy costs, while totally IGNORING the social costs of carbon per ton (now a minimum of 11 dollars per ton), in order to continue to fraudulently PICK FOSSIL FUELS as WINNERS.

In a sane world, the "IN the PUBLIC INTEREST" award for any energy generation source cannot be awarded without considering the SCC (social cost of carbon).

Fossil fuels are in the fossil fuel industry's interest, not the PUBLIC INTEREST.

Thermodynamic efficiency did not, and does not, have anything whatsoever to do with the prevailing use of fossil fuels, as you consistently, and erroneously, claim.

People like you always want to reduce this to a cost estimate game. But it is really an ethical issue. I read this in an excellent article on GRIST about discount rates and estimating carbon pollution costs to society.

Quote
Say you could ask the people of 2100 (some of whom may be your children or grandchildren), “would you rather inherit $1 trillion in cash or $1 trillion worth of avoided drought, storm, and famine?” Which do you think they would choose?

They will have lost biodiversity, up to half the species on the planet. They will have lost millions of acres of old-growth and tropical forest, most of the world’s coral reefs, and the bulk of world’s annual sea ice.

Those things will never return, not in time spans relevant to our species.
The natural world that has provided us sustenance since we were primates can not be restored once it’s gone. And there’s more to the biosphere than the “services” it provides humans. Some damages cannot be captured in dollar terms.


http://grist.org/article/discount-rates-a-boring-thing-you-should-know-about-with-otters/ (http://grist.org/article/discount-rates-a-boring-thing-you-should-know-about-with-otters/)

It's a long article. They use pictures of otters to try make the math less boring. But it's good reading IF you aren't biased in favor of dirty energy.  ;)

When you decide to figure in the subsidies, gamed laws and SCC (social Cost of Carbon - now between 11 and about 57 dollars a ton, depending on the discount rate used) in your energy math, we can talk.

Otherwise, take your cherry picked numbers designed to pick fossil fuels as sine qua non energy winners elsewhere.

Quote
I dutifully drink my beer from aluminium cans on the grounds that they are expensive enough to recycle, whereas glass isn't, not at my distance from the rest of the world anyway.  Probably aluminium isn't worth recycling energy-wise either, and you are welcome to have the solar-powered aluminium smelter near your backyard, but they don't sell beer in glazed stoneware flagons any more.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3f/c6/05/3fc605293980c80ac533be519a068f43.jpg)

BECAUSE of the subsidies, gamed laws and SCC, fossil fuels ARE NOT in the public interest. Fossil fuels are in the interest ONLY of the fossil fuel industry, PERIOD.

Enjoy your beer and your energy costs cherry picking ignorance, fossil fueler. 

 
(http://mauicauses.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Hokua-w-sign-3.jpg)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on March 12, 2017, 02:15:15 pm
Agelbert NOTE: These Container housing buildings aren't carbon neutral, but considering how cheap they are to set up, I'm sure they can easily be made carbon neutral.  ;D


Gorgeous Hotel Constructed From Shipping Containers Leaves Landscape Untouched

Mar. 10, 2017 03:22PM EST

MANY great pictures!  ;D

http://www.ecowatch.com/shipping-container-hotel-quadrum-2307833903.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 01, 2017, 06:01:08 pm
Welcome to Apple Park, possibly the world's coolest office building   (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

(https://assets.weforum.org/article/image/large_E3klX7tyj8M4JxrGAiNHnJClkSO0QVhEyRFO_kZU-zE.png)
Space race ... It’s not just big blue-chip organizations that are investing in better offices

Other than a mild sense of Sunday-night dread, offices rarely inspire much emotion among staff. But from now on Apple employees can be forgiven for going to work with a spring in their step.

The headline figures associated with the tech giant’s new ‘Apple Park’ headquarters are staggering – over the next six months or so, 12,000 employees will be moved to the 175-acre campus, which is reported to have cost $5 billion to construct.

Six years ago, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs addressed a Cupertino City Council meeting in California where he unveiled plans to create “the best office building in the world”.

It was Jobs’ last public appearance before he died. Now, his vision has been realized, and the end result is a futuristic four-storey, circular edifice that resembles a grounded spaceship.

Apple Park houses a 1,000-seat auditorium, a 100,000 square ft (9292 sqm) fitness centre, 300,000 square ft (27,870 sqm) of secure research and development facilities, two miles (3.2 km) of walking and running paths, 1,000 bicycles, an orchard, a meadow and a pond.

(https://assets.weforum.org/editor/kX4xAHU-5En6DqfodHyziRT1o_ZCYCpR3HsyJe4EiUk.PNG)

The migration of Apple workers is reportedly underway, with a steady flow of 500 employees expected to start work at the shiny new HQ every week until the mass relocation is complete.

But how exactly will such an ambitious, not to mention expensive, move benefit Apple?

‘The home of innovation’

It’s a slightly depressing fact that most people spend almost their entire working life inside an office. Apple hopes that moving to a state-of-the-art workplace will have an energizing effect on its workers.

With a market capitalization of more than $800 billion, Apple clearly isn’t short of cash. Yet that doesn’t mean spending isn’t carefully scrutinized – the vast expense of Apple Park initially raised eyebrows among some shareholders.

But for Jobs and other members of Apple’s senior leadership team, the estimated $5 billion cost was a price worth paying to cultivate innovation among staff and ensure the company continues to attract top-class personnel in the years ahead.

Speaking at a launch event in March last year, CEO Tim Cook said: “Steve's vision for Apple stretched far beyond his time with us. He intended Apple Park to be the home of innovation for generations to come.

“The workspaces and parklands are designed to inspire our team as well as benefit the environment. We've achieved one of the most energy-efficient buildings in the world, and the campus will run entirely on renewable energy."(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)

(https://assets.weforum.org/editor/7OyVjU23AINCXxGznmS2Qiq-1K3R1nCt7IrVDMn8030.PNG)

Other cool offices around the world

Apple Park may have caught the attention of envious employees from California to Calcutta, but there are plenty of other offices around the world that put the average workplace to shame.

Amazon is building a spectacular office in downtown Seattle where workers will soon be able to hold meetings and take lunch breaks inside three gigantic glass spheres that contain plants, streams and even a few treehouses.

The tallest of the glass and metal spheres rises 90 ft (27m) and is more than 130 ft (40m) in diameter, with two smaller spheres to each side.

(https://assets.weforum.org/editor/AZdycCK6mheFJ7OTnwxql4RyqCQBiuJDU-fAg3iPY8o.PNG)

The Edge building in Amsterdam, designed for consultancy firm Deloitte, has been billed as the world’s greenest, and possibly smartest, office space. It even has espresso machines that “recognize” workers and remember how they like their coffee.

(https://assets.weforum.org/editor/67cBIPD-h__6miFvOiTInsGd9kqd81EPzn503FH1E5E.PNG)

However, it’s not just big blue-chip organizations that are investing in better offices.

Last year, the Guardian newspaper ran a feature on the world's coolest offices in which ordinary workers championed their extraordinary workplaces.

Concepts included a rooftop terrace in Berlin that hosts BBQs, beer drinking and morning yoga classes; an indoor go-karting track in an office block in Canada; and treadmill desks at Ernst&Young’s London office.

Most of us can only dream of working in such an environment, but as employers up their game to attract and retain skilled staff, perhaps in the future more people will enjoy coming to the office.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/05/apple-park-coolest-office-building-in-world/
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 14, 2017, 05:49:27 pm
Quote
Mark had spent years studying how to make green roofs succeed in the harsh Texas landscape. The secret was simple: bring back the plants that were here before European settlement. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)

Author Christopher Brown’s Natural Underground Home In The City

June 14th, 2017 by Guest Contributor

(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/06/14/author-christopher-browns-natural-underground-home-city/
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on October 17, 2017, 02:20:06 pm
(http://geothermalexpo.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/REW-logo-new.jpg)

(http://aemstatic-ww1.azureedge.net/content/rew/en/articles/2017/10/swiss-solar-decathlon-house-scores-a-perfect-100-in-engineering/_jcr_content/leftcolumn/article/headerimage.scale.large.jpg/1508179296917.jpg)

Swiss Solar Decathlon House Scores a Perfect 100 in Engineering (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png)

October 16, 2017

By Renewable Energy World Editors
   
Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Daniel Simmons today announced the winning team of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Solar Decathlon 2017 in Denver, Colorado. The Swiss Team took first place overall by designing, building, and operating the house that best blended smart energy production with innovation, market potential, and energy and water efficiency. The University of Maryland took second place followed by the University of California, Berkeley and University of Denver team in third place.

“The U.S. Department of Energy Solar Decathlon provides real-world training and experience for the energy professionals of tomorrow,” said Acting Assistant Secretary Simmons. “It is also a live demonstration of innovative products available today that can help tackle global energy challenges such as reliability, resilience, and security.”

The teams competed in 10 contests throughout a nine-day stretch that gauged each house’s performance, livability and market potential. They performed everyday tasks including cooking, laundry and washing dishes, which tested the energy efficiency of each house. Full competition results and details about the individual contests may be found at www.SolarDecathlon.gov.

“This prestigious competition engages students from across the country and internationally to develop the skills and knowledge to become the next generation of energy experts, and I want to recognize all of these teams for their hard work and dedication,” said Linda Silverman, director of the Solar Decathlon. “Today’s results are the culmination of two years of collaboration among students from different academic disciplines — including engineering, architecture, interior design, business, marketing, and communications — who otherwise might not work together until they enter the workplace. Together, we’re ensuring that employers have the qualified workers they need to support American job growth.”

The results of the Market Potential and Engineering contests were also announced today. Northwestern took first place in market potential by scoring 92 of 100 possible points. For the Market Potential Contest, each competing house was evaluated by a jury of professionals from the home-building industry that evaluated the overall attractiveness of the design to the target client and the market impact potential of the house. Some of the criteria included appeal and marketability for the target client, the livability in meeting the target client’s unique needs, the house’s cost-effectiveness, and how easily the competition prototype could be constructed successfully by a general contractor.

Bob Dixon, director of the Office of Strategic Programs in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy at DOE, presenting the award, said, “The jury said that this team exhibited an outstanding use of focus groups, in-home visitation, storyboards, and a socio-linguistic analysis used to identify and validate design attributes through interviews in their target market segment.”

Team Netherlands claimed second place in the Market Potential Contest with 90 points, and Team Daytona Beach took third place with 85 points.

The Swiss Team took first place in engineering with a perfect score of 100 possible points. For the Engineering Contest, each competing house was evaluated by a group of prominent engineers who determined which house best exemplifies excellence in innovation, system functionality, energy efficiency, system reliability, and documentation through their project manual and construction drawings.

Bob Dixon, presenting the award said, “The jury believes the first-place house in the Engineering Contest offers comprehensive performance modeling that sports clear graphs, detailed explanations and a variety of representations. The quality of the thermal envelope is exceptional and carefully calibrated to the target climate with very good resistance to heat flow, a solid focus on airtightness, and high-quality components such as triple-glazed windows and sliding doors.”

University of Nevada, Las Vegas claimed second place in the Engineering Contest with 98 points, and Northwestern took third place with 95 points.

This year’s collegiate teams were chosen nearly two years ago through a competitive process. The selected teams and their projects represent a diverse range of design approaches, building technologies, and geographic locations, climates and regions – including urban, suburban and rural settings. They also aim to reach a broad range of target housing markets including empty-nesters, disaster relief, low-income, multigenerational, single-family and Native American communities. Teams have gathered their combined interdisciplinary talents to design and build the houses, as well as to raise funds, furnish and decorate the houses, and optimize the houses’ performance. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-020617175335.png)

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2017/10/swiss-solar-decathlon-house-scores-a-perfect-100-in-engineering.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on January 19, 2018, 01:06:21 pm
Nomadic home prototype built out of a shipping container (Video)

Kimberley Mok (@kimberleymok)

Design / Green Architecture

January 18, 2018

SNIPPET:

© Cocoon Modules

Repurposing shipping containers for human habitation is a bit of a hit-or-miss affair: sometimes it makes sense, and sometimes it doesn't.

Nevertheless, that hasn't stopped designers from trying. Natural mattress company Coco-mat of Greece (previously) teamed up with Greek shipping container architecture startup Cocoon Modules to create this fresh-looking prototype for an earthquake-resistant modular home that features smart, energy-efficient technology.

As the Cocoon Modules design team explains:

Our modules are more than 15% cheaper than the prefabricated construction in Greece and 30% cheaper than the traditional [construction]. They can be built within weeks in designated industrial spaces and can then be transported and placed on site. By using the modularity of the container we create ergonomic spaces of great design that can be expanded as LEGOs do.

https://youtu.be/oUDo-fSSV0E

full article with several pictures:

https://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/shipping-container-home-cocoon-modules-coco-mat.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 03, 2018, 04:47:50 pm
Tesla To Sell Solar Products In 800 Home Depot Stores (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311017193926.png)

February 1st, 2018 by Steve Hanley

SNIPPET:

With 2,200 stores, Home Depot is one of the largest retailers in America. By July of this year, 800 of those stores will have high-profile, 12 foot high, 7 foot wide displays advertising Tesla kiosks located inside. Staffed by Tesla employees (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-020617175335.png), they will feature Tesla solar products — solar panels, rooftop solar systems, and Powerwall storage batteries. Bloomberg reports some locations will also have interactive demonstrations of how the products work.

Full article:✨

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/02/01/tesla-sell-solar-products-800-home-depot-stores/



Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on February 04, 2018, 03:10:48 pm
(https://c1cleantechnicacom-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/01/Earth-Home.jpeg)
Photo by Archi0780 of earth house estate in Dietikon made by Peter Vetsch (CC BY-SA license)

Earth-Sheltered Home Plans — Modern Designs, Earth Lodges, Prehistory, & Skara Brae (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif)
t
February 3rd, 2018 by James Ayre

SNIPPET:

Earth-sheltered homes are homes built using soil or substrate of some kind as external thermal mass to provide insulation, and various climate control properties. To put that in plain language, earth-sheltered homes use dirt, rock, and vegetation to protect the home from the elements.

Such homes can offer significant advantages over conventional approaches when it comes to reducing heating/cooling costs and needs, indoor temperature variation, and durability (ability to remain unaffected by high winds and storms).

(https://c1cleantechnicacom-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/01/Earth_house_white.jpg)
Image by Archi0780 (CC BY-SA license)

Designs can vary quite a bit — with homes being either nearly completely encased in earth and underground (as in traditional quiggly/kekuli designs in Pacific North America); built above ground but completely encased in thick earth (like traditional Plains and Eastern Woodlands Indian “Earth Lodges”); embedded into cliffs and caves; built as wattle-and-daub homes set several feet into the ground; amongst a great many other options.

As alluded to above, earth-sheltered homes are found all over the world and likely go very, very far back in time … possibly even further than “home sapiens” do — as seems to be true of long-houses, seaworthy ships, and temporary yurt-style structures, amongst other technologies (needles/sewing, jewelry, blades of various kinds, highly specialized fishing hooks and traps, etc.).

(https://c1cleantechnicacom-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/01/Earth-Sheltered-Homes-Plans.jpg)
Image via Good Home Designs

Full article with more pictures: (https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/304fa75d7ed32d56ae1ff3a796933cb65eac738511bb960bc4a77bb2f67c0af6.gif)

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/02/03/earth-sheltered-home-plans-modern-designs-earth-lodges-prehistory-skara-brae/

Quote
Barry Alternative Fact Covfefe

The hype behind earthship homes is greater then their performance, humidity is often very high, they gravitate towards 10C (nicer then freezing winter but much cooler then humans are accustomed to even in summer), they are expensive to build, they can be very maintenance intensive (and leaky), the thermal mass sucks heat away from the home and so forth. Thats not even getting in to the Radon concerns.

Green Building Advisor has an article called "Earthship Hype and Earthship Reality" that explains the hype rather well.

agelbert > Barry Alternative Fact Covfefe

The ambient temperature of a home reliant on passive geothermal, such as the Earthship type home, is dependent on the latitude and altitude of the terrain they are built at. One cannot use broad brush criticism on this type of construction. In some places it is a good idea and in some places it is a bad idea.

In order to be truly objective in doing a cost benefit analysis of passive geothermal advantaged homes versus more conventional above ground homes, you must compare the thermal conductivity of the materials used for the structures.

For example, at an outside air temperature of 25C (77F),
earth is 1.50,
ground or soil/moist area 1.00,
ground, plaster/sand 0.71,
water 0.58,
ground or soil/dry area 0.50,
sand/dry 0.25,
plywood 0.13,
straw slab insulation 0.09,
and 0.024 for air.

Source:
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/thermal-conductivity-d_429.html

The value for air is a bit misleading. The fact is that air must not be moving for that value to be of any use for insulation. Air around an above ground structure is always moving, thereby drawing heat away from the structure immersed in the air. The cost of insulating in air must be compared with the cost of insulating with other materials like straw slab with earth berming, which has such great value as insulation because it does trap air in cellulosic material.

It is true that moving earth around a home costs a lot of money. That alone jacks up the price of an "Earthship" type home above what most people can afford, as you have noted. There are other high cost issues like meeting code requirements for a home that is, like a basement, in need of a certain number of exit areas in case of fire.

However, there are potentially huge savings to the earth bermmed or buried home due to reduced insurance costs. These homes, provided they are above any flood prone areas, are virtually impervious to storms which produce high winds, torrential rain, lightning and tornados.

Global Warming will visit that type of damage to above ground homes with increasing frequency and consequent cost. So, the added security the passive geothermal advantaged homes boast will increase their popularity.

All that said, provided you build your earth bermed or buried home in an area that geothermally works to give you 61 degrees F (about 16C) year round, instead of 50F (10 C), the energy required for heating and cooling will be far less than that of a conventional above ground home, regardless of how well the above ground home insulated.
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on March 26, 2018, 07:05:22 pm
🌟 DIY dome homes built from AirCrete are an affordable & ecofriendly option (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185701.png)

Derek Markham

October 6, 2017

(https://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2017/10/21192699_1495153530544566_4608657736705933264_n.jpg.860x0_q70_crop-smart.jpg)

https://youtu.be/b9Gmor0I3mw

Informative article with video and graphics:


https://www.treehugger.com/tiny-houses/diy-dome-homes-made-aircrete-affordable-ecofriendly-option.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on May 05, 2018, 04:51:34 pm
(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-170218174357.png)

Frying Pan Tower: Coast Guard Light Station-Turned Adventure Bed and Breakfast Up for Auction

May 3, 2018 by Mike Schuler

(http://3kbo302xo3lg2i1rj8450xje.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Frying-Pan-Tower-2.jpg)
The light tower was built in Louisiana and brought by barge to Frying Pan Shoals in 1966. Photo: Frying Pan Tower

For decades, the Frying Pan Tower, located some 34 miles off the coast of North Carolina, functioned as a U.S. Coast Guard light station, serving as an aid to navigation and alerting ships to the shallow shoals just beyond.

But after more than 25 years of continuous operation, the light station went dark in 1992 and slowly fell into disrepair. That is until 2010 when North Carolina resident, Richard Neal, purchased the tower from the U.S. government and spent the following years turning it into an “adventure” bed & breakfast.

Starting today, however, Neal has put the tower up for auction to the highest bidder, with a minimum starting bid of just $10,000. 👀  :o

But before you whip out your checkbook (or PayPal), there are a few things to keep in mind.

The Frying Pan Tower is accessible only by helicopter or boat. It does get hit by hurricanes. And, I would assume, it requires constant upkeep. Other than that, it looks homey. You’ll have plenty of privacy. It’s located in waters just beyond Federal and State limits so you won’t have to pay taxes or adhere to U.S. laws.

There’s also has full kitchen, high-speed internet, cold and hot running water (filtered rainwater, no water bills!), solar and wind power, backup generators, and redundant communications, among many other amenities. It’s also located in 50-feet of clear blue water near the Gulf Stream, so it’s a great place to take a dip or catch your dinner  😋  ;D right from the deck.

As far as the bed and breakfast part goes, Frying Pan Tower offers 3-day, 2-night packages for up to 8 to 12 guests in 8 guest rooms each with their own ocean view (obviously).

Here’s more about the tower provided in the auction description:

The light tower is a steel oil drilling platform, known as a “Texas Tower” on top of four steel legs that has been modified to be used as a lighthouse. The eighty (80) foot light tower is located approximately 32 miles southeast of Bald Head Island, NC and marks the shoals at the confluence of the Cape Fear River and the Atlantic Ocean. The platform consists of a main floor is a living area of approximately 5,000 square ft. that includes 5 twin bedrooms, 3 queen bedrooms, a crew room with 3 twin beds, stainless steel kitchen, workshop/hoisting area, storage rooms, laundry, recreation area and 2 toilet facilities. The top is the steel I-beam supported helipad. The corner light tower houses an internal staircase, a lantern room at the 126′ level and an observation platform for equipment at 134′ above the water. The maintenance level provides access to the steel truss structure and I-beam cross members, holding tanks and an emergency ladder to the water on the North East leg.

Still sound good to you? More information about the auction can be found here or check out the video below:

https://youtu.be/i4dqj48UZ3Y

http://gcaptain.com/now-is-your-chance-to-own-the-frying-pan-tower-a-former-light-station-turned-adventure-bed-breakfast/

UPDATE on bids:

May 4, 2018

HIGH BID: $33,333.33

BIDDER ID: xxxxxxxxxxxx1203V

The Frying Pan Tower is located out of sight of land in 50 ft. of clear blue Atlantic waters (lat & lon  33°29′N 77°35′W) With the Gulf Stream close by, we often are pleasantly warm when it's still cold onshore and mild when it's too hot to walk on the sand at the beach so don’t let a great weekend go to waste, come be part of history!

http://www.fptower.com
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 26, 2018, 10:16:32 pm
EcoWatch

By Natural Resources Defense Council

Jun. 25, 2018 11:52AM EST

Clean Electric Heating Already Cost-Effective for Many (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418202709.png)  (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

By Pierre Delforge

A new report bolsters the case for widespread electrification of heat ⚡  and hot water ⚡ in buildings.

The report (https://www.rmi.org/insights/reports/economics-electrifying-buildings/) by the nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png) finds that replacing onsite use of fossil fuels in buildings by efficient and flexible electric ⚡ heating is a key component of the deep decarbonization necessary to limit global average temperature increase to 2°C.

It also concludes that if our country is to reach decarbonization goals, it will require eliminating most or all of the pollution generated by the burning of fossil fuels in furnaces and water heaters, along with other measures.

The report reinforces the findings of an earlier NRDC study, which cites broad electrification of buildings, factories and vehicles as among the ambitious but achievable actions needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050 and stave off the worst effects of climate change.

NRDC's report, America's Clean Energy Frontier: The Pathway to a Safer Climate Future, envisions roughly 90 percent of U.S. residential and commercial buildings to use electric space- and water-heating appliances by 2050, up from just under half today. It also calls for boosting the use of electric vehicles so that they represent about 30 percent of new vehicle sales by 2030 and 85 percent by 2050.

Both reports highlight the benefits of using electricity from an increasingly clean grid in place of fossil fuels like natural gas for space and water heating, an often overlooked, but critical path for reducing carbon pollution.

RMI's report, The Economics of Electrifying Buildings, notes that electrification ⚡ can deliver cost savings, especially for new home construction, oil and propane customers, and homes that bundle electrification with rooftop solar.

When owners of existing homes install or replace an air conditioner at the same time as they electrify heating, electrification costs roughly the same as a new gas furnace and A/C. And this is when home electrification is still avant-garde, and early adopters pay premium prices for equipment, installation and electricity use. As the market develops, competition increases, and utilities offer electric rates that better reflect the cost of supplying energy at different times of day, electrification costs will come down, making it the more cost-effective option for most Americans.

Electric space and water heating also can be managed to shift energy consumption in time, aiding the cost-effective integration of large amounts of renewable energy onto the grid, the report notes. This can further reduce carbon pollution and generate utility bill savings. This is already becoming important in states like California which have committed to ramping up their use of clean energy like solar and wind power.

Both reports are must reads for state and local officials who have moved to pick up the slack on climate action in the absence of Washington's leadership in confronting the crisis. The authors have the following recommendations for utilities, regulators and policymakers:

1. Prioritize rapid electrification of buildings currently using propane and heating oil in space and water heating.

2. Stop supporting the expansion of the natural gas distribution system, including for new construction.

3. Bundle demand flexibility programs, new rate designs, and energy efficiency with electrification initiatives.

4. Expand demand flexibility options for existing electric space and water heating loads.

5. Update energy efficiency resource standards and related goals to account for total energy reduction across fuels (fossil fuels and electricity).

California, long a clean energy trendsetter, has already taken steps to promote electrification in transportation and in buildings.

But more can—and must—be done.

California is considering legislation that would promote building decarbonization.

Assembly Bill 3232, which has passed the Assembly and is now before the Senate, would require the California Energy Commission to assess how best to reduce emissions from residential and commercial buildings by at least 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030.

Senate Bill 1477, which has passed the Senate and is before the Assembly, would require the energy commission to develop two programs: the first to provide incentives for designers and builders to innovate and build near-zero emissions new buildings; the second to spur the market development of clean heating technologies such as high-efficiency heat pumps.

The fossil fuels and the electricity we use in buildings are responsible for roughly one quarter of greenhouse gas emissions in California, and natural gas and propane burned for space and water heating are the largest source of those emissions.

Nationally, the burning of fossil fuels for space and water heating in buildings generates 560 million tons of carbon pollution each year, a tenth of total U.S. emissions, the RMI study notes.

Substituting electricity for fossil fuels to heat homes and businesses could cut U.S. carbon pollution by 10 percent, the RMI study says.

But building electrification faces challenges, such as low consumer awareness of the benefits and availability of the technology, limited contractor expertise and higher upfront costs for high-efficiency products.

SB 1477 would help reduce costs by developing the market for clean heating technologies in the way that California's Solar Initiative has driven the growth of solar in the state. As RMI's analysis points out, the cost of new heating technology such as heat pumps will decline as the market grows.

As RMI's and NRDC's reports spell out, electrification ⚡  offers significant opportunities to cut harmful pollution, and reduce utility bills, two critical opportunities to help mitigate California's air pollution and housing affordability challenges.

We now need to turn the opportunities into action. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817121649.png)

https://www.ecowatch.com/clean-electric-heating-2581218126.html
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 28, 2018, 04:43:27 pm
EcoWatch

By Natural Resources Defense Council

Jun. 25, 2018 11:52AM EST

Clean Electric Heating Already Cost-Effective for Many (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418202709.png)  (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

By Pierre Delforge

A new report bolsters the case for widespread electrification of heat ⚡  and hot water ⚡ in buildings.

The report (https://www.rmi.org/insights/reports/economics-electrifying-buildings/) by the nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png) finds that replacing onsite use of fossil fuels in buildings by efficient and flexible electric ⚡ heating is a key component of the deep decarbonization necessary to limit global average temperature increase to 2°C.

It also concludes that if our country is to reach decarbonization goals, it will require eliminating most or all of the pollution generated by the burning of fossil fuels in furnaces and water heaters, along with other measures.

The report reinforces the findings of an earlier NRDC study, which cites broad electrification of buildings, factories and vehicles as among the ambitious but achievable actions needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050 and stave off the worst effects of climate change.

NRDC's report, America's Clean Energy Frontier: The Pathway to a Safer Climate Future, envisions roughly 90 percent of U.S. residential and commercial buildings to use electric space- and water-heating appliances by 2050, up from just under half today. It also calls for boosting the use of electric vehicles so that they represent about 30 percent of new vehicle sales by 2030 and 85 percent by 2050.

Both reports highlight the benefits of using electricity from an increasingly clean grid in place of fossil fuels like natural gas for space and water heating, an often overlooked, but critical path for reducing carbon pollution.

RMI's report, The Economics of Electrifying Buildings, notes that electrification ⚡ can deliver cost savings, especially for new home construction, oil and propane customers, and homes that bundle electrification with rooftop solar.

When owners of existing homes install or replace an air conditioner at the same time as they electrify heating, electrification costs roughly the same as a new gas furnace and A/C. And this is when home electrification is still avant-garde, and early adopters pay premium prices for equipment, installation and electricity use. As the market develops, competition increases, and utilities offer electric rates that better reflect the cost of supplying energy at different times of day, electrification costs will come down, making it the more cost-effective option for most Americans.

Electric space and water heating also can be managed to shift energy consumption in time, aiding the cost-effective integration of large amounts of renewable energy onto the grid, the report notes. This can further reduce carbon pollution and generate utility bill savings. This is already becoming important in states like California which have committed to ramping up their use of clean energy like solar and wind power.

Both reports are must reads for state and local officials who have moved to pick up the slack on climate action in the absence of Washington's leadership in confronting the crisis. The authors have the following recommendations for utilities, regulators and policymakers:

1. Prioritize rapid electrification of buildings currently using propane and heating oil in space and water heating.

2. Stop supporting the expansion of the natural gas distribution system, including for new construction.

3. Bundle demand flexibility programs, new rate designs, and energy efficiency with electrification initiatives.

4. Expand demand flexibility options for existing electric space and water heating loads.

5. Update energy efficiency resource standards and related goals to account for total energy reduction across fuels (fossil fuels and electricity).

California, long a clean energy trendsetter, has already taken steps to promote electrification in transportation and in buildings.

But more can—and must—be done.

California is considering legislation that would promote building decarbonization.

Assembly Bill 3232, which has passed the Assembly and is now before the Senate, would require the California Energy Commission to assess how best to reduce emissions from residential and commercial buildings by at least 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030.

Senate Bill 1477, which has passed the Senate and is before the Assembly, would require the energy commission to develop two programs: the first to provide incentives for designers and builders to innovate and build near-zero emissions new buildings; the second to spur the market development of clean heating technologies such as high-efficiency heat pumps.

The fossil fuels and the electricity we use in buildings are responsible for roughly one quarter of greenhouse gas emissions in California, and natural gas and propane burned for space and water heating are the largest source of those emissions.

Nationally, the burning of fossil fuels for space and water heating in buildings generates 560 million tons of carbon pollution each year, a tenth of total U.S. emissions, the RMI study notes.

Substituting electricity for fossil fuels to heat homes and businesses could cut U.S. carbon pollution by 10 percent, the RMI study says.

But building electrification faces challenges, such as low consumer awareness of the benefits and availability of the technology, limited contractor expertise and higher upfront costs for high-efficiency products.

SB 1477 would help reduce costs by developing the market for clean heating technologies in the way that California's Solar Initiative has driven the growth of solar in the state. As RMI's analysis points out, the cost of new heating technology such as heat pumps will decline as the market grows.

As RMI's and NRDC's reports spell out, electrification ⚡  offers significant opportunities to cut harmful pollution, and reduce utility bills, two critical opportunities to help mitigate California's air pollution and housing affordability challenges.

We now need to turn the opportunities into action. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817121649.png)

https://www.ecowatch.com/clean-electric-heating-2581218126.html (https://www.ecowatch.com/clean-electric-heating-2581218126.html)
RMI press releases are always so rosy. Its very hard to do heating on renewables in the more northern climes. The mismatch between sun hours and heat requirements is hard to overcome. Banked hydro and massive wind deployment but still.  The new generation of heat pumps hold promise but it locks you into a grid dependant net metered scenario.  I dislike grid tied. It has its uses but you have to buy in to all the losses and costs of a large grid and it does not foster conservation or resiliency.  I will be moving to solar electric hot water for summertime usage within two years Far too much solar in the summer so use it or loose it. For winter time heat I'll stick to my wood stove.
Cheers,   David

As long as you do what you are presently doing to keep your family happy and healthy, you are a credit to the human species in regard to prudent energy use. That said, remember that most people live in urban environments where they cannot go out and chop some wood, as you can. I live in a wooded area and am prohibited from touching any tree in my rented lot for any reason.

In regard to your view that RMI likes to paint "rosy" scenarios, I beg to differ. That group of scientists as as hard nosed as they come. Their Chief Scientist, Amory Lovins (he is a physicist), way back in the 1980's, designed and built his own fluid measurement instruments, Said instrument data forced the college textbooks on fluid dynamics to be rewritten. The math formulas were wrong. Amory Lovins proved they were wrong. Mechanical Engineers, because they used these faulty math formulas to design the air conditioner compressors and radiators and pipes that fed gasses or liquids into and out of machinery, from giant power plants to lawn mowers, had inadvertently reduced their efficiency by several percentage points. 👎 

Please do NOT say that RMI is painting "rosy" scenarios, David. This society owes RMI BIG TIME for many improvements in refrigeration technology and pipe design, never mind their massive contributions to insulation efficiency in buildings.

RMI did the reinsulating and heating and cooling efficiency maximizing work on the Empire State Building some years back. That building now saves well over one million dollars a year in energy costs. That isn't "rosy", that is real. When Amory Lovins makes the claim that our society can run with 80% less energy, that is not based on happy talk or hopium speculation, it is based on hard nosed scientific, real world analysis of how energy is used and abused in our civilization. It's not "rosy scenario" talk.

Here's what Amory Lovins says about the typical reaction to his claims:

Quote
Only puny secrets need protection; big discoveries are protected by public incredulity. - Amory Lovins

In order for you to know how serious, how detailed, how thorough and how reality based Amory Lovins and his Associates at the Rocky Mountain Institute are, please copy these videos and watch them when you aren't busy. Your Expert Crafstman comprehensive knowledge of building techniques, energy use and insulation materials, as well as your knowledge of the level of unnecessary energy use inefficiency our civilization operates under will get some good, money making tips from watching these videos. Amory Lovins knows his applied energy use science.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/527210744178167809/z6CbCdS5.jpeg)

   Energy efficiency 1 Amory Lovins
https://youtu.be/O5txQlEI7bc


Energy efficiency 2 Amory Lovins
Some Key points about "rocket science" t=4292
https://youtu.be/8kUih_t9aCs
Energy efficiency 3
https://youtu.be/RjcWx7U1sjQ

Energy efficiency 4
https://youtu.be/zW6gWZD4394


Energy efficiency 5
https://youtu.be/_H8ZHgkY8L8


Bananas 🍌 at 8,000 feet in colorado without hydricarbon heat 1982-2009!
https://youtu.be/x-9jd2OMwJQ

The next industrial revolution
https://youtu.be/1zfO3HW6xCw
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 28, 2018, 05:29:51 pm
EcoWatch

By Natural Resources Defense Council

Jun. 25, 2018 11:52AM EST

Clean Electric Heating Already Cost-Effective for Many (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418202709.png)  (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

By Pierre Delforge

A new report bolsters the case for widespread electrification of heat ⚡  and hot water ⚡ in buildings.

The report (https://www.rmi.org/insights/reports/economics-electrifying-buildings/) by the nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png) finds that replacing onsite use of fossil fuels in buildings by efficient and flexible electric ⚡ heating is a key component of the deep decarbonization necessary to limit global average temperature increase to 2°C.

It also concludes that if our country is to reach decarbonization goals, it will require eliminating most or all of the pollution generated by the burning of fossil fuels in furnaces and water heaters, along with other measures.

The report reinforces the findings of an earlier NRDC study, which cites broad electrification of buildings, factories and vehicles as among the ambitious but achievable actions needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050 and stave off the worst effects of climate change.

NRDC's report, America's Clean Energy Frontier: The Pathway to a Safer Climate Future, envisions roughly 90 percent of U.S. residential and commercial buildings to use electric space- and water-heating appliances by 2050, up from just under half today. It also calls for boosting the use of electric vehicles so that they represent about 30 percent of new vehicle sales by 2030 and 85 percent by 2050.

Both reports highlight the benefits of using electricity from an increasingly clean grid in place of fossil fuels like natural gas for space and water heating, an often overlooked, but critical path for reducing carbon pollution.

RMI's report, The Economics of Electrifying Buildings, notes that electrification ⚡ can deliver cost savings, especially for new home construction, oil and propane customers, and homes that bundle electrification with rooftop solar.

When owners of existing homes install or replace an air conditioner at the same time as they electrify heating, electrification costs roughly the same as a new gas furnace and A/C. And this is when home electrification is still avant-garde, and early adopters pay premium prices for equipment, installation and electricity use. As the market develops, competition increases, and utilities offer electric rates that better reflect the cost of supplying energy at different times of day, electrification costs will come down, making it the more cost-effective option for most Americans.

Electric space and water heating also can be managed to shift energy consumption in time, aiding the cost-effective integration of large amounts of renewable energy onto the grid, the report notes. This can further reduce carbon pollution and generate utility bill savings. This is already becoming important in states like California which have committed to ramping up their use of clean energy like solar and wind power.

Both reports are must reads for state and local officials who have moved to pick up the slack on climate action in the absence of Washington's leadership in confronting the crisis. The authors have the following recommendations for utilities, regulators and policymakers:

1. Prioritize rapid electrification of buildings currently using propane and heating oil in space and water heating.

2. Stop supporting the expansion of the natural gas distribution system, including for new construction.

3. Bundle demand flexibility programs, new rate designs, and energy efficiency with electrification initiatives.

4. Expand demand flexibility options for existing electric space and water heating loads.

5. Update energy efficiency resource standards and related goals to account for total energy reduction across fuels (fossil fuels and electricity).

California, long a clean energy trendsetter, has already taken steps to promote electrification in transportation and in buildings.

But more can—and must—be done.

California is considering legislation that would promote building decarbonization.

Assembly Bill 3232, which has passed the Assembly and is now before the Senate, would require the California Energy Commission to assess how best to reduce emissions from residential and commercial buildings by at least 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030.

Senate Bill 1477, which has passed the Senate and is before the Assembly, would require the energy commission to develop two programs: the first to provide incentives for designers and builders to innovate and build near-zero emissions new buildings; the second to spur the market development of clean heating technologies such as high-efficiency heat pumps.

The fossil fuels and the electricity we use in buildings are responsible for roughly one quarter of greenhouse gas emissions in California, and natural gas and propane burned for space and water heating are the largest source of those emissions.

Nationally, the burning of fossil fuels for space and water heating in buildings generates 560 million tons of carbon pollution each year, a tenth of total U.S. emissions, the RMI study notes.

Substituting electricity for fossil fuels to heat homes and businesses could cut U.S. carbon pollution by 10 percent, the RMI study says.

But building electrification faces challenges, such as low consumer awareness of the benefits and availability of the technology, limited contractor expertise and higher upfront costs for high-efficiency products.

SB 1477 would help reduce costs by developing the market for clean heating technologies in the way that California's Solar Initiative has driven the growth of solar in the state. As RMI's analysis points out, the cost of new heating technology such as heat pumps will decline as the market grows.

As RMI's and NRDC's reports spell out, electrification ⚡  offers significant opportunities to cut harmful pollution, and reduce utility bills, two critical opportunities to help mitigate California's air pollution and housing affordability challenges.

We now need to turn the opportunities into action. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817121649.png)

https://www.ecowatch.com/clean-electric-heating-2581218126.html (https://www.ecowatch.com/clean-electric-heating-2581218126.html)
RMI press releases are always so rosy. Its very hard to do heating on renewables in the more northern climes. The mismatch between sun hours and heat requirements is hard to overcome. Banked hydro and massive wind deployment but still.  The new generation of heat pumps hold promise but it locks you into a grid dependant net metered scenario.  I dislike grid tied. It has its uses but you have to buy in to all the losses and costs of a large grid and it does not foster conservation or resiliency.  I will be moving to solar electric hot water for summertime usage within two years Far too much solar in the summer so use it or loose it. For winter time heat I'll stick to my wood stove.
Cheers,   David

As long as you do what you are presently doing to keep your family happy and healthy, you are a credit to the human species in regard to prudent energy use. That said, remember that most people live in urban environments where they cannot go out and chop some wood, as you can. I live in a wooded area and am prohibited from touching any tree in my rented lot for any reason.

In regard to your view that RMI likes to paint "rosy" scenarios, I beg to differ. That group of scientists as as hard nosed as they come. Their Chief Scientist, Amory Lovins (he is a physicist), way back in the 1980's, designed and built his own fluid measurement instruments, Said instrument data forced the college textbooks on fluid dynamics to be rewritten. The math formulas were wrong. Amory Lovins proved they were wrong. Mechanical Engineers, because they used these faulty math formulas to design the air conditioner compressors and radiators and pipes that fed gasses or liquids into and out of machinery, from giant power plants to lawn mowers, had inadvertently reduced their efficiency by several percentage points. 👎 

Please do NOT say that RMI is painting "rosy" scenarios, David. This society owes RMI BIG TIME for many improvements in refrigeration technology and pipe design, never mind their massive contributions to insulation efficiency in buildings.

RMI did the reinsulating and heating and cooling efficiency maximizing work on the Empire State Building some years back. That building now saves well over one million dollars a year in energy costs. That isn't "rosy", that is real. When Amory Lovins makes the claim that our society can run with 80% less energy, that is not based on happy talk or hopium speculation, it is based on hard nosed scientific, real world analysis of how energy is used and abused in our civilization. It's not "rosy scenario" talk.

Here's what Amory Lovins says about the typical reaction to his claims:

Quote
Only puny secrets need protection; big discoveries are protected by public incredulity. - Amory Lovins

In order for you to know how serious, how detailed, how thorough and how reality based Amory Lovins and his Associates at the Rocky Mountain Institute are, please copy these videos and watch them when you aren't busy. Your Expert Crafstman comprehensive knowledge of building techniques, energy use and insulation materials, as well level of unnecessary energy use inefficiency our civilization operates under will get some good, money making tips from watching these videos. Amory Lovins knows his applied energy use science.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/527210744178167809/z6CbCdS5.jpeg)

You misunderstand. I love RMI, get all the emails, watch the videos etc. That is not what I mean by rosy. Their numbers always work they are always right on.  This would be a long drawn out series of posts so I won't go into it if you do not see it yourself. No time, no energy.
cheers, David

Sorry David, but the term "rosy" has a connotation of not being real world. Why do you think I would assume otherwise? I do not get it.

I too love RMI. I am glad you share my respect for all the solutions they propose. I apologize if I misunderstood you. They want everybody to go electric. I do too. You said that was a "rosy" scenario. You then said you were going to follow a different path. What, exactly did I miss?
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 28, 2018, 05:40:09 pm
Bananas 🍌 at 8,000 feet in colorado without hydrocarbon heat 1982-2009!
https://youtu.be/x-9jd2OMwJQ
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on June 30, 2018, 09:36:12 pm
Sorry David, but the term "rosy" has a connotation of not being real world. Why do you think I would assume otherwise? I do not get it.

I too love RMI. I am glad you share my respect for all the solutions they propose. I apologize if I misunderstood you. They want everybody to go electric. I do too. you said that was a "rosy" scenario. You then said you were going to follow a different path. What, exactly did I miss?
Regarding heating in the winter, my wife really likes our wood pellet stove.

You do not understand how radical that statement is.

When we got the house, it also came with electric baseboard heating, so the understanding was, we would be using that, and the wood pellet stove would get torn out eventually.  But she agreed to give it a try, and we ended up never using the the baseboard heating, only using a couple plug-in electric space heaters for a few hours about a dozen times when we would wake up to find the stove had gone out in the middle of the night.

(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300618124425.png)

Oh, I understand how "radical" it seems to most people, all right; So does Amory Lovins.

Amory Lovins on Energy Efficency Breakthroughs (real world 90% plus waste reduction) that seem hard to believe:

Quote
"Only puny secrets need protection; big discoveries are protected by public incredulity."

JD, I have never had a baseboard spaceheater in my present  70' X 14 ' extremely well insulated and energy efficient Pine Grove Manufactured home. It came with a kerosene fired furnace. That furnace was a cash cow for the maintenance people that had a "silver" or a "gold" contract which included the "inspection" annually and lowered rates for (Help! NO HEAT!) home visits in a winter emergency. Those contracts were ignored by yours truly. Those contracts, as far back as the year 2000, were a MINIMUM of $200 a year. Those contracts DID NOT include fuel costs or routine electrode replacements, though they did include labor. BFD. They would punish you for not taking their contracts by charging you $90 just to come to your home in winter (NO HEAT!) BEFORE parts and labor. And THAT was if it was during a weekday during the day. Nights and weekends were, OF COURSE, extra. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png)

I considered that highway robbery. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418202709.png) I still do. I shudder to think what that pack of furnance maintenance crooks charge now.

And then there were those nice folks from Rowley Fuels who wanted my social security number so they could establish an account for me where coulld pay within 30 days of receiving the bill so I did not have to pay when the Kerosene was delivered. I had been their customer in the home I had rented right next to this one (before this one existed) for two years. I was not having any of that. So, I continued to pay on delivery with a check, even though it was a hassle when the weather was really bitter cold and snowy.

Since you do not understand how not having white privilege works, I won't bore you with details about how every dumbassed ignorant local yokel here is NOT asked for a social security number to be billed monthly for his fuel.

Any IDIOT can tell that the fuel company MUST be paid, or they won't keep providing you with fuel. So, you can pretend Rowley fuels was acting reasonably if you wish. They weren't. As I said before, since you have never been in my shoes, you cannot understand how clever Vermont style prejudices are directed towards brown folks like me and my wife. You and I have been down this road before. Believe what you will. I willl not argue with you. The irony for Rowley Fuels' selective social security requests Vermont fun and games "procedure" is that the dude with the "right color" that bought that trailer after I left eventually stiffed Rowley Fuels (I observed fuel deliveries when no one was home. The guy would leave the bill at the door). I know he eventually stiffed them because one winter (a few years later) the Rowley Fuels truck showed up at his home three times within a month after fuel delivery, without delivering fuel. No one would answer the door. A few months later a different outfit delivered the fuel. LOL 

Now I will return to the cost issue.

After the cost of Kerosene went to the moon (around 2003), PLUS some ungodly gauging by the furnance maintenance people, I decided that the furnace was not economically practical, when compared with small electric heaters.

Some background is in order. I had baseboard space heaters a long, long time ago in a two story Colonial (5357 Fortuna Parkway, Clay, New York - you can see it with Google Earth) I owned when I worked at Syracuse TRACON (1978-1982). They've got a pool now. I didn't, but I planted those trees 🌳 🌳in the back (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png).  I also planted two blue spruce 🌲🌲 in the front as wind breaks but the new owners chopped them down around 2002 👎.  I supplemented that incredibly expensive (0.11 per kWh back THEN!) electrical heat with a couple of cords of wood (I would buy annually as logs and saw and split myself) with fireplace heating.

Before anybody jumps in and tells me how fireplace heating is "inefficient" because you actually lose more heat up the chimney than you get from the wood while you are faked out into believing otherwise by the radiant heat from the flames, let me explain that I had an insert in the fireplace with pipes and and tempered glass doors. The heatilator gizmo convected cooler air from the family room into the pipes that fed the air out the upper part of the unit back into the room.

I know how to make a fireplace efficient, even if most people don't. I know how to avoid creosote issues and chimney hot spots too.

Where were we? Right, the kerosene furnace is more thermodynamically efficient than electric heating (WHEN MAINTENANCE, LABOR, PARTS AND BUSH FUEL PRICE SHOCKS ARE IGNORED).

As of 2004, after a winter where a (Help! NO HEAT!) rather expensive maintenance guy almost killed us by setting the electrodes so poorly that some unprejudiced Vermonter with a conscience on the street (DAYS LATER!) stopped and warned us that our stack was all black and billowing black smoke (NO, complaining to the maintenance people did not help. NO, they did not reimburse us for the cost of that visit. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120716190938.png) YES, we had to pay for ANOTHER visit where a different dude set the electrode gap properly. (http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Spiele/smilie_game_017.gif) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)). I said, THAT'S IT! I'M DONE WITH THIS CRAP!

We went electric with portable heaters. (http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg) We heated more ourselves than all 980 square feet of the home.

Yeah, it's not as comfortable as the WASTEFUL PIG HABIT of keeping he house toasty, which is the customary American way. Yeah, I used to do that. Yeah, it should not be done. Yeah, we need to reduce ourselves. Yeah, though it turned out to be more efficient (used LESS ENERGY) than the Kerosene CRAP furnace, I switched so I could save MONEY, not energy.

We do not DO long baseboard space heaters. They are STUPID. They are INEFFICIENT. If you have them, THROW THEM AWAY.

JD, you are a permaculture guy. I suggest you take a HARD LOOK at WHERE those wood chip pellets, that you THINK are coming from waste shrups of shavings or whatever, are REALLY coming from. THAT IS, they are DESTROYING old growth forests for those "efficient" wood pellets! If your supplier has sworn on a stack of Bibles that they do not get their wood from virgin or old growth forests, they are LYING to you. 

Now, with the Vornado use a phenomenon that they poorly understood in the past, a type of air swirl is created that electrically heats with much LESS energy than before.

Go 100% ELECTRIC ZONE Heating, JD. If you can get that juice from solar panels, so much the better, but stop using wood for heat and/or gas for cooking. It's BAD for the biosphere. It provides profits to people that do not give a rat's ass about future generations.

The only one that can claim a lick of sense in continuing to burn wood for heat here is David B. because he harvests it himself, PERIOD.

Anyone that tells you that hydrocarbon heating is more energy efficient than ZONE electrical resistance heating is cherry picking convenient facts and ignoring inconvenient realities of the VAST amount of energy required just to GET THAT HYDROCARBON FROM THE WELL TO THE REFINERY TO STRIP OUT THE OXYGEN TO THEN GO THROUGH THE CRACKING TOWERS TO THE STORAGE TANKS TO THE TRUCK TO THE SUPPLIER TO YOUR HOUSE where, of course, Amerikans bask in high energy density/enthalpy of hydrocarbons for heat and poo-poo those ugly, inefficient, fire hazard, baby killer (you get the idea) electric heaters.  ::)

The fact that ONE furnace requires MUCH MORE energy to manufacture than that needed to manufacture the TOTAL amount of ZONE electric heaters you will need for about FIFTY YEARS OR SO, is somehow not part of the "efficiency" calculations.  ::)

The fact that ONE furnace costs MUCH MORE MONEY than the TOTAL amount of ZONE electric heaters you will need for about FIFTY YEARS OR SO, is somehow not part of the "cost" calculations.  ::)

The FACT that electric heaters are maintenance free versus furnace ANNUAL maintenance inspection costs plus $100 (plus $) winter visits for NO HEAT and labor and parts, are not part of the "cost comparison" calculations.  ::)

Finally, there is one DETAIL that I love to bring up. If the igniter/electrode assemply is not tuned EXACTLY RIGHT, you don't get complete combustion. The electrode gap gets out of spec regularly. Most people don't get it adjusted (unless black smoke is billowing out your stack, of course  :P) more than once a YEAR, if they are thorough. Many have them checked only when the smoke looks strange, NOT even annually.

THEREFORE, any fossil fueler (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png) that parades the enthalpy of Kerosene as a justification for using that hydrocarbon CRAP over electric resistance heating is pushing ERRONEOUS energy density figures. Those Infernal electrodes start losing spec within two months of having their gap set. I KNOW. I watched my stack often (experience is the best teacher. :P). Those electrodes WEAR from HEAT in the combustion chamber of the furnace. Those electrodes have to be changed.

You NEVER have to change an electrical resistance on an electric heater unless your dog ate a portion of it.

Burning Kerosene is STUPID. Using electric ZONE small heaters with Vornado swirl technology is SMART.

I have done ALL the math on furnaces. They are NOT cost efective. The defenders of that hydrocarbon burning CRAP will argue until the cows come home about hydrocarbon high energy density/enthalpy and the "horrendous" efficiency losses using a resistance to heat with entail. They will yaba-daba-doo about how electricity is mostly produced by burning hydrocarbons, as if the OBVIOUS solution to that was not simply getting MORE electricity from Renewable Technology, NOT keeping on with the hydrocarbon horseshit!

I am SICK AND TIRED of the DUMBASSED GAME the proponents of this insane, unsustainble clusterfuck called hydrocarbon based civilization keep trying to play by defending the abysmal stupidity, as well as totally unjustified INEFFICIENCY, never mind the POLLUTION added on, of this SUICIDAL use of hydrocarbons. These IDIOTS are quiet as DEATH about the 174,000 PLUS gasolene fires in cars each year PLUS the 500 or so deaths each year, just in the USA, from CO poisoning CAUSED by using hydrocarbons for heat.

Quote
CO poisoning is the nation's leading cause of accidental poisoning deaths ☠️. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that about 500 people die due to CO poisoning annually. https://sf-fire.org/carbon-monoxide-facts (https://sf-fire.org/carbon-monoxide-facts)

INSTEAD, these hydrocarboon hustlers wail and moan about those electric space heaters burning down houses and killing all those poor people that didn't use hydrocarbons to heat their home, like all good Germans Americans should. 😇

BULLSHIT! Vornado, and other types of top notch small area electric heaters have all sorts of failsafes now. They use air swirl fluid dynamics physics (NEW scientific knowledge pioneered by AMORY LOVINS!) that vastly improved efficiency. In addition, there are some other high tech type electric heaters, that, though above my budget, are even more efficient.

Yeah, I know I'm not going to convince that pack of stubborn hydrocarbon loving mules here of going fully electric. I get that. They are married to the past. That past is killing us. They DO NOT get that. I do.

The only downside, which I DO NOT consider a downside, but some bright bulb here certainly may consider it as a downside, is the water pipe risk of freezing. The furnace has ducts under the floor, next to the water pipes. The ducts, though insulated, stlll lose some heat that keeps the pipes well above freezing. So, since we switched to all electric nearly 15 years ago  ;D, we have to open the faucet a bit during the two most bitterly cold months here (January and February).

Anyone that claims hydrocarbon heating is more efficient than electrical resistance heating is married to the past and quoting inaccurate figures from old electrical use technology, as well as furnace efficiency figures based on complete combustion, something that does NOT happen for ten months out of the year, in addition to all the other vast amount of energy required to get that crap to your house.

Amory Lovins HAS DONE ALL THE MATH. Electric heating is NOT "radical". Electric heating is the only truly sustainable way to heat, as long as we get that juice from Renewables. See below how the Rocky Mountain Institute has PROVEN that electrical resistance heating is the tecchnology everyone should embrace NOW.

Quote
  The Innovation Center redefines how occupants experience and control their individual comfort. Integrative design eliminated mechanical cooling and reduced the heating system to a small, distributed electric-resistance system.

Most buildings rely on blowing hot or cold air using large combined HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) systems to maintain a set temperature, which wastes energy and actually has little impact on how comfortable a person feels. In contrast, the Innovation Center addresses all six factors that impact individual comfort, requiring dramatically less energy.

Six Factors that Influence Comfort

The Innovation Center’s comfort strategy is guided by the following factors, which were delivered according to listed design strategies:

Air velocity: Fans overhead, USB and standing fans, and fans in personal heating and cooling chairs

Surface temperature:
Superinsulating windows and envelope, thermal mass, bio-phase-change materials in walls and lightshelves, predictive preconditioning by charging thermal mass with a night flush, and personal heating and cooling chairs

Air temperature: Natural ventilation, operable windows, distributed, radiant heating mats in floors, and aggressive heat recovery (90% efficient) to preheat ventilation air

Clothing level:
Adaptive dress code for staff and event attendees

Metabolic rate: Stand-up desk options

Humidity: Not actively controlled

Technologies to Deliver Comfort

Several technologies are used in the Innovation Center to deliver thermal comfort, using the least amount of energy possible including:

Electric floor mats provide targeted, radiant heat to occupants and are only used on the coldest mornings.

Personalized heating/cooling chairs provide occupants with individual thermal controls by delivering heating and cooling directly to their body with only 14 watts in heating mode, and four watts in ventilation mode.

Personal USB fans that plug into computers for each occupant. Good airflow, (>120 fpm) enables air temperatures to be four degrees F warmer without making occupants uncomfortable.

High-efficiency ceiling fans that use only two to 30 watts depending on speed settings, exceeding ENERGY STAR requirements by 450–750%

 https://rmi.org/our-work/buildings/pathways-to-zero/scaling-zero-net-carbon/rmi-innovation-center/thermal-comfort/ (https://rmi.org/our-work/buildings/pathways-to-zero/scaling-zero-net-carbon/rmi-innovation-center/thermal-comfort/)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on July 03, 2018, 02:03:21 pm

I will do a bit of shameless plugging for the company. Here is a testimonial to one of our showcase systems. There is nothing modest here to see but it is the reality of what is pushing solar forward. 3 panels on a cabin might be noble in its austerity but those systems do lights some water pumping and a bit of refrigeration at best. This one is a grid zero system which uses the grid when it needs a boost but does not feed back to it.  Enjoy

https://youtu.be/1QGH-VEo1Vg

(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280917164227.png)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on July 03, 2018, 02:20:13 pm
I will do a bit of shameless plugging for the company. Here is a testimonial to one of our showcase systems. There is nothing modest here to see but it is the reality of what is pushing solar forward. 3 panels on a cabin might be noble in its austerity but those systems do lights some water pumping and a bit of refrigeration at best. This one is a grid zero system which uses the grid when it needs a boost but does not feed back to it.  Enjoy

https://youtu.be/1QGH-VEo1Vg

Nice system, and what a nice testimonial! What's the output?

And the house. Wow. I'll never own anything that nice, I don't expect.

Investment banker? Gold miner?



I wrote this and lost it, so this is the Cliffs Notes version.

I picked this installer because I know someone who works there. Turns out they are a local company but are 100% Sunpower. The Texas franchise, entire state. They do Whole Foods and UT. Lots of high end installs. Their panels are engineered differently than any panel I've ever seen. Design improvements according to them. They claim almost zero hail problems in this hail prone area, which is impressive.

100% Micro-inverters. He said they just bought Enphase and would be using Enphase inverters going forward.


Any feedback on Sunpower?

The deal is excellent. But they have to achieve a certain efficiency level to get me the city rebate. That means I can't immediately put panels on the east facing roof. Because it would lower the efficiency of the entire system.

I'd have to do 43 panels on the south and west faces to max them and get the rebate. That's a 13.8 Kw system and it should cut my grid bill by about half, according to their estimate, and he says they hit it pretty close. I still get the federal tax credit too. That's much more of a subsidy (30%).

I can also get a federal tax credit on adding the additional lower output east-facing panels, which I can add as soon as I collect the rebate on the first install. I haven't yet seen numbers on how much that would add to the output.

They have stellar financing (2.9% for 12 years), so I can buy the 13.8Kw system with the same dollars I'm using to buy power. That seems like a no brainer. I'll max the east roof too, I think. I want to see how much it adds to the bill.

Stellar warranty from Sunpower, which also warrants the install (roof leaks included). They use Invisimount racking. 25 year warranty  on everything, 92% efficiency guaranteed in 25 years.

And once again, the federal tax credit is going away. Not for a couple of years I think, but with the cost of borrowing almost guaranteed to go up too, it looks like a good time to make this happen
.
sounds good. Do a websearch on the reviews of the enphase model they are selecting. They had some duds. I'll admit I'm biased as I had to replace 23 of them out of 40 on a nice old ladies roof this spring. That was 3 years ago though I'm sure they are back on their game now. Split roof partial shade micros are the way to go...

Will do. Thanks for your advice. It is greatly appreciated.

Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on July 14, 2018, 05:50:53 pm
(https://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/5b3a8684b340272f7d99310c/16:9/w_1280/Modern-Green-Home-001.jpg)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/527210744178167809/z6CbCdS5.jpeg)

THE REPORT

Designers vs. Climate Change

Leading architects, designers, and urban planners are devising plans to help mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Are they our best hope for a brighter future?

Posted July 4, 2018

text by Meaghan O'Neill


SNIPPET:

For professionals like these, business as usual is simply outdated. In the U.S. today, buildings consume 39 percent of total energy used—higher than both the transportation (29 percent) and industrial (32 percent) sectors. But what if buildings—or even entire cities—could generate more energy than they used, clean the surrounding air and water, and even sequester carbon dioxide? The idea isn’t too far-fetched.

Technology to mitigate emissions already exists, is accessible, and can even be cost-effective. And small course corrections in our approach to the built environment could make a big a difference in emissions industry-wide. (Designing for resilience—that is, creating and protecting built environments that will withstand rising seas, more frequent and severe storms, and other effects of climate change—is also paramount.) According to Paul Hawken’s 2017 book Drawdown, if just 9.7 percent of new buildings were net-zero energy by 2050, global greenhouse gas emissions would be 7.1 gigatons lower. That’s equivalent to eliminating annual emissions from all livestock worldwide. Yet the biggest barrier to building greener buildings and cities may not be cost or political will, but simply inertia.

(https://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/5b3a86d68c7e812ffa8b14bb/master/w_806/Rye-Barn-007b.jpg)
Top: A modern home by ZeroEnergy Design; Above: The interior of a barn renovated by ZeroEnergy Design. Photo: Eric Roth

“Designing a building to code is the worst possible building you could build,” says Horowitz. “We need to do better.”(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418202709.png) Considering fuel inputs, the entire lifecycle of a building and the future of the grid are essential factors, says Horowitz, a self-proclaimed “data literacy” advocate who joined the Architecture 2030 Challenge (a group with the goal to make all buildings and major renovations carbon-neutral by 2030) as a way to stay publicly accountable for all projects in her portfolio.

It’s also worth mentioning that building smaller, more efficient spaces would go a long way toward reducing our collective carbon footprint. In the 1950s, for example, the size of the average American home was about 1,700 square feet; today, it’s closer to 2,500 🐷 🐖.

Designing for Low Carbon Impact—and Human Beings

“Decisions we make as architects and engineers impact the land we build on for the next 100 years,” says Cara Carmichael, an engineer and environmental designer at the Rocky Mountain Institute, a nonprofit organization that works to dissuade the use of fossil fuels. With the help of ZGF Architects, RMI recently built its 15,610-square-foot Innovation Center in Basalt, Colorado, to be a showcase of net-zero energy efficiency.

(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-140718181011.png)

By using high-end windows and insulation, an airtight envelope, passive solar design, natural and efficient artificial lighting, automation and metering, natural ventilation, and photovoltaics, the building can produce more energy than it uses in a year. In cooler months, radiant heating delivers warm air where people need it most, instead of overheating low-use spaces (like ceilings and transitional areas). The result is a building that’s 74 percent more efficient than its average counterpart.

While advanced systems react to external weather and lighting conditions, people who occupy the building retain precise control over their micro-environments. Desk, ceiling, and even in-chair fans allow for personal adjustments. And while a sophisticated louver system creates shade as necessary—eliminating the need for air conditioning—individuals can open windows when they want fresh air. Because buildings like this champion low-tech methods (tight envelopes and LED lighting, for example) rather than high-tech mechanical systems, they can often be built at or near the same cost as a traditional building.

One key to success is the early integration of cross-disciplinary teams who can accurately predict how a building will perform over its lifecycle. “It’s not just a check-the-box thing,” says Carmichael, who collaborated with architects, engineers, land planners, solar and lighting experts, and contractors to crunch numbers from the get-go. “It’s a powerful tool to shape design.”

Net Zero, Passive House, and Living Buildings

Since the 1990s, various certifications, like the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, have emerged for healthier buildings with lower carbon impact. Now, Net Zero, Passive House, and Living Buildings labels are also helping designers create better spaces. Though specific criteria vary, they ultimately share several common goals: The design of built environments that use less fossil fuel energy, produce less pollution, and improve the well-being of people who use them.

Built in collaboration with the Miller Hull Partnership, the Bullitt Center in Seattle, a designated Living Building, is a net-positive energy building that uses photovoltaics to generate power. There’s no cooling system—windows automatically open and close—and it even employs six stories of composting toilets. In short, it operates like a natural system—always responding to its conditions.

Designer Jason McLennan explains Living Buildings in a TEDx talk.

https://youtu.be/gSMecC6pcGo

To reduce their impacts significantly, such buildings implement these and other tools, including ground source heat pumps, smart thermostats, green roofs, and closed-loop water systems. While some features remain expensive to install, all are easy to acquire.

Several public and multi-unit Passive House projects are also pushing the efficiency envelope. In New York, the Perch Harlem, designed by architect Chris Benedict, consumes 90 percent less energy than a standard building and 75 percent less than similar new construction. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png)(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185701.png) “Making these projects happen—and quickly—at scale is really exciting,” says Horowitz, who has also worked on several multi-unit spaces. Elsewhere, entire communities are working toward net-zero energy goals. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, for example, plans are underway for all new buildings to be net-zero by 2040.

FULL ARTICLE: (https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/304fa75d7ed32d56ae1ff3a796933cb65eac738511bb960bc4a77bb2f67c0af6.gif)

https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/designers-architects-take-on-climate-change


Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on October 04, 2018, 02:38:17 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/527210744178167809/z6CbCdS5.jpeg)

RMI RELEASES NEW VIDEO ON CARBON-FREE CITIES (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818185038-16442135.gif)

Cities are at the forefront of climate change risk and opportunity. Over 9,000 cities are making climate commitments, but they will only get us so far and must be substantiated with on-the-ground solutions that enable cities to make rapid progress toward near-term decarbonization and put them on a path to full climate neutrality. RMI’s new Carbon-Free Cities video highlights work in four cities in Europe, China, India, and the US that are leading the efforts against climate change with innovative on-the-ground projects.

WATCH NOW:

https://youtu.be/7dQo-iT5T_c

Rocky Mountain Institute

Published on Sep 28, 2018

Cities are at the forefront of climate change risk and opportunity. Nearly 600 cities are making climate commitments, but they will only get us so far and must be substantiated with on-the-ground solutions that enable cities to make rapid progress toward near-term decarbonization, and put them on a path to full climate-neutrality. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418203111.png)

The Carbon-Free City Handbook helps city staff implement climate policies and actions that resolutely place their communities on an aggressive path toward sustainable, low-carbon economies. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-060518153110.png)
Title: Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings
Post by: AGelbert on October 04, 2018, 02:51:41 pm
(https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/lLqKvXnlZ6Cbtf3jDN8jitwRnsnX__SS9dROr4VBbCKsCKnIhW9HhoCummvXEWtPF_S401qSnQsO0K8sXor7EjmxlPR9adjQR6OCUk_Ktf4n-Kcy15UkAKbi402I_Wny=s0-d-e1-ft#https://info.rmi.org/l/310101/2017-05-03/353d/310101/4811/Spark_header.jpg)

Zero-Energy Homes Are Ready for Mainstream Markets (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818180835-1624479.gif)

October 2, 2018  |  By Alisa Petersen Michael Gartman

SNIPPET:

Zero-energy (ZE) homes—efficient homes that produce or procure as much renewable energy as they consume over the course of a year—are often marketed as luxury homes, only available to the select few that are willing to pay a significant premium to do the right thing for the environment. In keeping with this luxury perception, research shows these homes are often more comfortable and healthier than conventional homes for a variety of reasons. Mainstream media outlets have suggested cost premiums as high as 40 percent for sustainable real estate.

However, the economics for these homes have changed: ZE homes have quietly passed cost thresholds that make them not only good for the environment but also cost-effective. As the underlying technologies and design elements continue to improve and scale, these costs will continue to decline.

Read more: (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818184310-1635923.gif)

https://www.rmi.org/zero-energy-homes-are-ready-for-mainstream-markets/