Want to reduce your heating, cooling bills by 90 percent?

[kristopher]

Want to reduce your heating, cooling bills by 90 percent?

By Renee Schoof | McClatchy Newspapers

CLEVELAND — Everyone needs a home, but not every home, it seems, needs a furnace — even in Cleveland.

A house built for a new museum exhibit shows how walls more than a foot thick, big triple-pane windows, doors like bank vaults and clever engineering can cut heating and cooling costs — and pollution — by 90 percent. The house keeps a comfortable temperature year-round. No need for heavy sweaters, no drafts, no noise.

Thousands of furnace-free homes in Germany have been built to this cutting-edge efficiency standard, but in the U.S. there are only 15 buildings certified to the same level of extremely low energy use. Until now, none has been open to the public.

The people in Cleveland who made the exhibit happen are enthusiastic about the idea, known as a "passive house." It costs more than conventional housing does, to be sure, as much as about 20 percent. If the special equipment the house needs becomes locally available, and energy prices rise, the economics improve.

In the meantime, the Cleveland Museum of Natural History decided ...

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/06/14/115767/want-to-reduce-your-heating-cooling.html

[AtheistCrusader]

1. K&R

[handmade34]

2. I'll take one

[mahina]

3. Amory Lovins calls it 'tunneling through the cost barrier'

http://www.rmi.org/rmi/

Spiffy! Makes perfect economic sense. Thanks for sharing that example!

[madokie]

4. The reduction in heating and cooling cost will more than make up the difference in cost

between one of these and a conventional house to make it a bargain by anyones accounting.

[Javaman]

5. That's not reducing...

that's a new home. "costs more than conventional housing does"

Reducing would be showing me a way to retro fit my current home.

Headlines are everything.

[AtheistCrusader]

7. Reducing below current production homes. Or current standards.

Whichever you prefer.

Difficult to retrofit this stuff onto an existing house, but I suppose it could be done, to some degree. You'd be gutting most of the exterior, even the window/door headers.

[Javaman]

11. A while back I looked into what it would cost in both money and materials to

retrofit a home for straw bales design.

Since I have a slab foundation, it would first take increasing the footprint of said foundation to accommodate the additional thickness of the walls.

The cost for just that was enough for me to give up.

However, it didn't stop me from exploring it as a concept.

First increase the foundation foot print by 2 feet out from each exterior wall. Tie in the new concrete to the existing foundation but drilling companion rebar holes.

Once concrete is dry, then a retrofit for the eves. This was the next biggest cost. Most houses don't have a deep overhang so this would need to be dealt with. Once a solution (smarter people than me) was found, then the construction of the hay bale walls could begin.

Depending on what the original exterior material is/was, I don't believe it would need to be removed.

I have hardiplank, so I fell that with some creative tie bolts through the walls would be all that was needed to attach the bales to the house.

Of course, this would require opening up selected spots on the interior walls to secure the bolts then dry walling back over.

My concept hits a snag as to how the eves would still vent the attic while at the same time allowing for connection with the hay bales.

I think it can be done, but like everything else, at a cost.

I also have an idea for using the attic space for rain water storage. LOL I have a lot of spare time. LOL

[pscot]

25. And that's the problem

To make real headway we need to retrofit the entire housing stock, most of which is abysmally low in energy efficiency.

[Javaman]

26. Exactly right.

All these great pie in the sky ideas are wonderful, but when reality hits the pavement, the great ideas are only available to the very few that can afford it.

While the rest of use are SOL.

[kristopher]

27. Let me ask you a question...

What are the estimates of realistic demand reduction that can be achieved via residential and commercial retrofits over the next 25 of so years?

You describe it as a problem, and I'm wondering just how much of a problem you see it to be. What kind of policies do you think could help alleviate the problem you see?

[pscot]

28. Just for openers

Retrofit to what standard? Every state and local jurisdiction has it's own code requirements. Ninety % of the housing stock is more than 20 years old. Half was built before 1970. Every retrofit has a unique set of problems that have to be identified, if they are to be solved, by the homeowner and one or more small conractors. As Javaman said, money is a big issue. IIRC there was money in the original stimulus plan for energy efficiency retrofits, but it was at least partly in the form of vouchers to Home Depot; not a wise choice in my opinion. I think the first order of business, back in 2008, should have been a National Building code with stringent energy efficiency requirements. Germany has a very tough national code, which is one reason they're so much more energy efficient than we are. As much as anything, the country needs leadership, and the push for a national energy code could have clarified the issues and suggested solutions. Of course such an effort would have been met with howls of outrage at the proposed job-killing, way-too-expensive, facist-socialist kenyan takeover of American homes, but that issue is moot, since it didn't happen.

average U.S. household consumed 136 million British thermal units (MBtu) of primary
energy in 1996. Energy consumption varies regionally and by housing type. For the average
single-family household, 39% of the energy use is attributable to space heating, 14% to water
heating; 9% to refrigeration; 8% to cooling, 6% to lighting; 3% to cooking; 3% to clothes drying,
and the rest (20%), to other uses

http://eetd.lbl.gov/ie/pdf/LBNL-43640.pdf

The first home I owned, which was built in 1906, was insulated with a light dusting of something like shredded cardboard.

After the energy shocks of the 1970s there was increased awareness of the importance of improving the energy efficiency of new housing. Over the past 20 years, homeowners have improved the thermal integrity of their homes. Eighty-one percent of single-family houses have insulation in the roof or ceiling and 70% have insulation in the walls. Double or triple-pane windows are found in 36% of all households and 61% of replacement windows are double or triple-pane glass.

More overhead insulation and better glass in addition to plugging leaks could bring the heating bill down. But solar hot water heating looks like an obvious choice. It offers significant savings and we have the technology to do it now. All we lack is the will. Most green energy sites recommend it as the first choice, but our politicians , not so much. It's not as sexy as the latest breathless press release from CalTech or MIT, but if even half of 77 million households could cut energy use by 5% it would be a big deal.

[kristopher]

29. How about energy efficiency ratings and labels for all buildings?

Make it a national requirement that would have to be part of the building's certification of occupancy prior to transfer of ownership.

What kind of change do you think that would result in, if any?

[pscot]

30. The housing market is moribund

Making houses harder to sell would likely finish it off. Also, since most sub-standard housing that would be affected is owned by the lower middle class, it would probably finish them off too. The Republicans would love it.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pscot]

32. The idea of certification is not unreasonable

in itself. And I can see the logic of making an energy efficiency determination at the time of resale. On the other hand, attaching it to the resale process would, in my opinion, be deadly. The cost, probably around $300 to $500 per house in inspection fees, would almost surely come out of the (already struggling?) sellers pocket. And who wants to buy a house that doesn't meet the certification standard? And that brings us back to the point I made upstream: there is no national energy code for buildings, nor is one going to emerge from Washinton in the current climate.

[One_Life_To_Give]

6. $50k for families that move every 5 yrs?

The length of time an average family expects to stay in a house is going to have a huge impact. That and how well it affects resale value vs spending on an additional bath or upgraded kitchen etc. It has been my observation and I recall reading that we in the US move more frequently than my counterparts in Europe. One starter house after marriage to be followed by another in a better school district before the kids start kindergarten. Perhaps up-sizing again as the kids approach the teenage years to be followed by downsizing and/or retirement community once the kids are moved out.

Disposability isn't just for the stuff purchased at Wallyworld. We expect ROI's of less than 5yrs typically much less. Putting a stove in your kitchen that will be passed to your children and grandchildren isn't a thought that most americans will think of. Just as we don't buy tools that were made so that they could be passed to our kids and grand-kids. Contrast that to building a house that you expect your kids not only to be born in but to die in as well.

[AtheistCrusader]

8. Do you have numbers on that?

Some of us would disagree. I scored a house in a good school district to start with, have been in the house 10 years, and I buy tools that don't suck from snap-on, mac, etc.

If my $1,200 stove doesn't last till my kids are grown, i'm going to take a dump on the steps of GE's corporate headquarters.

[One_Life_To_Give]

9. Nor do I move so frequently

But what I find is 5-6yrs avg.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_often_does_the_average_family_move

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2102600?ref=W_Ask&utm_source=Ask

And from what I hear if that is a recent stove. We all will be looking for pictures ;^)

Now this may still work for your Great Grandkids 80th birthday cake.
Although for $20k I would expect as much

[AtheistCrusader]

10. Looks like an old Kelvinator.

My GE Profile should last pretty good. But at some point, I may need to repair it. At least replace the glass top at some point. Aside from that, it's got a pretty sturdy design.

[guardian]

12. Looks can be deceiving.

"Looks like an old Kelvinator"

The photo in #9 is of a very expensive AGA cooker with 4 radiant-heat ovens. One of unique features AGA ranges/ovens is that it is always on and hot. So there is no waiting to wait for it to get hot to start cooking. There are no switches or dials.

[AtheistCrusader]

13. That doesn't sound very energy efficient.

[crikkett]

14. Remember tthe Alamo

The description of the building could have been the Alamo.

Except for the 3xpaned windows.

[canoeist52]

15. I'm assuming a super-insulated house like that would need

some kind of air-exchanger. I worked installing carpet in the 70's in a super-insulated thick-walled house. When we unrolled the carpet pad we had to open all the windows as the smell of formaldehyde was so strong. Smelled like plumbing glue. We'd never smelled this before using the same pad.

Ha - now I read that formaldehyde is considered a cancer toxin---great.

[AtheistCrusader]

22. It has one. A very special one

that scavenges heat from the exhaust atmosphere, and transfers quite a lot of it to the incoming air.

[Kennah]

16. Does it scale down well?

"Upstairs, the master bedroom has large windows, much like the living room. The house has two other bedrooms and two and a half bathrooms. Including the basement, it's 2,500 square feet."

2,500 sf is a big fucking house. OK, I know, it's small in the world of McMansions, but it's not a median sized home.

[A Simple Game]

17. Not that big.

Probably about 24x36. Remember this includes the basement.

[XemaSab]

19. It's still three times bigger than my house

:shrug:

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. It's too bad that heat doesn't grow on trees.

Oh, wait.



Retrofit cost for a renewable energy heating device is about $1500. Cut your heating costs 100%.

[kristopher]

20. Why not both?

Improved home energy efficiency save heat no matter the source of the heat.

[lumberjack_jeff]

24. There's a point of diminishing returns.

$50k of insulation is overkill. If you live where the temperature swings wildly, consider earth sheltering.

There is also an issue of comfort. Most people like to sleep in a cool room. Reheating the home in the morning costs energy no matter how well insulated it is.

[AtheistCrusader]

23. 100%? Even if you have commercial forestland in your back pocket

you still have to pay property taxes on the growing space for that wood you own.

It's still a significant reduction in cost, but not 100%.

[Nihil]

21. Seriously impressed by the door in that article ...

... even though it appears to open outwards (?)

The doors on our house are probably the least insulated parts
of the entire building so I've started thinking of replacing
at least the front door with a thicker one.

Don't think I'll be able to persuade Mrs.N to go as far as
this one though!

:wow: