Category Archives: Energy Tough Love Blog

Energy Tough Love Blog – A weblog from Community Energy Systems

Carbon Neutral Homes – Look even though all these examples are for rich people

Posted on by
1

It doesn’t need to be that way. Everyone can have carbon neutral homes if they just try.

http://www.greenspur.net/

“PROJECT OF THE YEAR”

National Association of Home Builders

CERTIFIED LEED PLATINUM

By fully integrating the design and the construction with the right products and services, GreenSpur can deliver cost effective and quality green building services from concept to completion. Green doesn’t have to look less and cost more.

GreenSpur delivers Carbon Neutral Capitol Hill

Capitol Hill Slide Show

Click Here

DSC_1092

Featured in Washington Spaces.

SOLD

4452

Through partnerships, good design, hard work, and some  common sense we can build a better tomorrow

:}

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-518809/Britains-100-carbon-neutral-home-unveiled–flat-pack.html

Britain’s first 100% carbon neutral home unveiled – and it’s a flat-pack

Last updated at 14:59 26 February 2008

It is the ultimate flat-pack product – your very own house and not only that, but Britain’s first affordable, super-eco friendly home.

The timber-frame house was unveiled in London for the first time today, with its designers proclaiming it the beginning of a revolution in property design.

Starting off as a flat-pack collection of frames, the houses can be built in three weeks in the same way as putting together a product from Ikea – albeit a bit more involved.

They are also designed to be carbon neutral and meet the Government’s strictest energy efficiency code.

Rural Zed, the consortium behind “the homes of the future”, are taking orders for the £150,000, three-bedroom house now.

The company promises to deliver the properties in as little as three months.

Bill Dunter, director of Zed factory, which is part of the consortium, said: “This is a revolution in house building

:}

Q&A: Carbon-Neutral Homes

Last updated: 07-Dec-2006

Gordon Brown wants all new homes to be carbon neutral within ten years. But what is a carbon-neutral home? And where can you find one now?…

What does carbon neutral mean? Good question. The Chancellor didn’t spell it out, and the Treasury has yet to offer a definition.

So no one has a clue? Some people do. Eco-warriors will tell you it means creating energy-efficient buildings and producing energy for home heating, hot water and electricity using eco-friendly on-site technology.

So what does that mean? For a development to be zero energy there would have to be no fossil fuels used to provide the heating and electricity.

Typically, a carbon-neutral development would generate electricity using photovoltaic cells, wind turbines or biomass sources – such as a combined heat and power plant using woodchip fuel.

It is acceptable to use a combination of on-site and off-site renewable energy – so you could produce some yourself and use some from a green energy supplier.

Super efficient insulation and the use of efficient fittings and appliances to cut down on energy and water use are also de rigeur.

So it’s about living in energy-efficient homes? Partly. But serious eco-folk point out that the embodied energy used in the construction of a building is a fundamental issue.

So the homes would also need to be built using sustainable materials – local timber, for example, or recycled materials – and as much of it as possible would need to be local so you’re not wasting energy transporting it.

Anything else? Yes. If you really want to go the whole hog, your carbon-neutral idyll would also be interested in providing residents with sustainable transport, access to sustainable local food, and a green and pleasant environment.

That can mean car and cycle clubs, on-site food growing, and landscaping to promote biodiversity (eg: wildlife gardens and nest boxes).

Do you need to be a hippy? No. Perfectly ordinary people with crew cuts and sensible shoes live in eco-homes – so you won’t need to stock up on king sized Rizzlas and petulia oil.

The Telegraph recently published an article about an eco-development in Ilkley, West Yorkshire, with the tag line “sandal-wearers need not apply”

:}

Carbon Neutral, Energy Neutral, And Carbon Set Asides – The world can be soooo confusing

Posted on by
Reply

Everybody wants to be green but nobody wants tell you what that means exactly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset

Carbon offset

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Wind turbines near Aalborg, Denmark. Renewable energy projects are the most common source of carbon offsets.

A carbon offset is a financial instrument aimed at a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) and may represent six primary categories of greenhouse gases.[1] One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases.

There are two markets for carbon offsets. In the larger, compliance market, companies, governments, or other entities buy carbon offsets in order to comply with caps on the total amount of carbon dioxide they are allowed to emit. In 2006, about $5.5 billion of carbon offsets were purchased in the compliance market, representing about 1.6 billion metric tons of CO2e reductions.[2]

In the much smaller, voluntary market, individuals, companies, or governments purchase carbon offsets to mitigate their own greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, electricity use, and other sources. For example, an individual might purchase carbon offsets to compensate for the greenhouse gas emissions caused by personal air travel. Many companies (see list[3]) offer carbon offsets as an up-sell during the sales process so that customers can mitigate the emissions related with their product or service purchase (such as offsetting emissions related to a vacation flight, car rental, hotel stay, consumer good, etc.). In 2008, about $705 million of carbon offsets were purchased in the voluntary market, representing about 123.4 million metric tons of CO2e reductions.[4]

Offsets are typically achieved through financial support of projects that reduce the emission of greenhouse gases in the short- or long-term. The most common project type is renewable energy, such as wind farms, biomass energy, or hydroelectric dams. Others include energy efficiency projects, the destruction of industrial pollutants or agricultural byproducts, destruction of landfill methane, and forestry projects.[5] Some of the most popular carbon offset projects from a corporate perspective are energy efficiency and wind turbine projects.[6]

:}

http://ezinearticles.com/?Carbon-Neutral—What-Does-It-Mean?&id=339090

Carbon Neutral – What Does It Mean?

Recently, there have been a lot of environmental buzzwords floating around. It can be difficult to find a clear definition. I’ll explain what the term “carbon neutral” means, and why it’s important.

You might think that carbon neutral simply means that something does not release any carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This is true to an extent, however it is too simple a definition. It is possible to release CO2 into the atmosphere and still be carbon neutral, so long it is balanced by a CO2 reduction elsewhere.

Biofuels are carbon neutral, even though burning them releases CO2. How can this be? Well, the carbon in the biofuel comes from photosynthesis, where CO2 is captured from the atmosphere by a plant and turned into glucose. The glucose can then be turned into more complicated molecules such as sugars, starches, oils and proteins. Sugars and starches can easily be converted into bioethanol, while oils can be converted into biodiesel. Carbon is removed from the atmosphere, stored in plants for a few months, then released when the biofuel is burned. For every gram of CO2 released by burning a biofuel, there was a gram removed from the atmosphere by photosynthesis just a few months ago. This perfect balance is why biofuels are carbon neutral.

Alternatively, the term carbon neutral can be used to describe energy that does not cause the release of any CO2 at all. For instance, solar cells, wind turbines and hydroelectric turbines generate electricity without releasing CO2. Nuclear power does not release CO2 during the generation process either.

There is a problem with this, however. Currently, virtually all forms of carbon neutral energy actually involve the burning of fossil fuels. The crops for biofuels are harvested using machinery that burns fossil diesel. This is because fossil fuels are a great deal cheaper than biofuels. Some ways of producing biofuels are controversial because so much fossil fuel has to be used in the production process. Some sources of bioethanol are in this grey area. Solar cells, wind and hydroelectric turbines are all produced and transported using fossil fuels to some extent. The technology exists to make these things truly carbon neutral, but it is hopelessly uneconomic at this time. Nuclear power involves the burning of fossil fuels in the mining and transport of uranium, the building of power stations, and the disposal of waste. When uranium becomes scarce, mining it will consume even more fossil fuels:}

:}

http://www.leonardo-energy.org/meaning-zero

The meaning of ‘zero’

By Bruno De Wachter / Published on Wed, 2010-05-05 05:30

‘Zero energy building’ and similar terms

Picture by Ian Britton on FreeFoto.com

Picture by Ian Britton on FreeFoto.com

You would think that no word has a more unambiguous meaning than ‘zero’: nothing is nothing. Not so in today’s world of green building. Labels like ‘zero energy building’, ‘nearly zero energy building’, and ‘zero carbon building’ are frequently used, but lack any standardised or official definition. The same can be said of the expression ‘bâtiment à énergie positive’ that is used in France.

‘Zero energy’ might play well commercially, but it is a clumsy label from a scientific point of view. No house or building can be built and maintained without energy. Strictly speaking, even manpower should be considered energy, and it brings along carbon emissions via food production and by the simple act of breathing. This illustrates that the meaning of ‘zero’ depends entirely upon where you draw the system’s boundaries.

The most narrow and also the most deceptive definition is to take only the electricity consumption of the building into account. The annual electricity production of the PV cells on the roof equals the annual electricity consumption of the building, and hey presto, you have a zero energy building. Who cares about the natural gas boiler in the basement?

Nearly zero energy

:}

Nearly zero..ha..haha…more tomorrow.

:}

Energy Neutral Homes Are Not That Hard To Create – Here is one step

Posted on by
1

To Think At One Time: I did not even think I would get requests for guest posts. Then: I questioned whether to allow guest posts. Now I am getting a request about every month for someone to share this space…And you know what I love it.

It’s not necessary to become a nerd to find out how wind power works

Wind is the result of the uneven heating of the Earth by the sun and the fact that temperatures will always be attempting to reach an equilibrium (heat is always moving to a cooler area). With the rising price of energy and the damage to the environment from classic fuels, it is increasingly equitable to harvest this renewable resource.

The benefits of wind energy are that it’s virtually free (after you purchase the equipment) and there’s no pollution. The disadvantages include the fact it is not a constant source (the speed varies and many times it is insufficient to make electricity) and it typically requires about one acre of land.

How Wind Energy Works

The volume of power that can be found varies by wind speed. The amount available is named it’s power density which is measured in watts per square meter. Due to this, the U.S. Department of Energy has separated wind energy into classes from 1 to 7. The typical wind speed for class 1 is 9.8 mph or less while the average for a class 7 is 21.1 or more. For effective power production, class 2 winds (11.5 mph average speed) are usually required.

In general, wind speeds increase as you get higher above the Earth. Due to this, the typical wind mill comes with a tower no less than 30 feet above obstructions. That there are two basic different types of towers employed for residential wind power systems (free standing and guyed). Free standing towers are self supporting and are usually heavier which means they take special equipment (cranes) to erect them. Guyed towers are supported on a concrete base and anchored by wires for support. They typically are not as heavy and most manufacturer’s produce tilt down models which may be easily raised and lowered for maintenance.

The kinetic (moving energy) from the winds is harnessed by a device called a turbine. This turbine contains airfoils (blades) that capture the energy of the wind and use it to turn the shaft of an alternator (like you have on a car only bigger).

There are two basic types of blades (drag style and lifting style). We all have seen pictures of old-fashioned windmills with the large flat blades which are an example of the drag style of airfoil. Lifting style blades are twisted instead of flat and resemble the propellor of a small airplane.

A turbine is classified as to whether it is built to be installed with the rotor in a horizontal or vertical position and whether the wind strikes the blades or the tower first. A vertical turbine typically requires less land for it’s installation and is a better option for the more urban areas of the world. An upwind turbine is designed for the wind to impact the airfoils before it does the tower.

http://www.residentialwindturbines.org/residential-wind-turbine.jpg

These units ordinarily have a tail on the turbine which is needed to keep the unit pointed into the wind. A downwind turbine doesn’t need a tail as the wind acting on the blades tends to maintain it oriented properly.

These turbine systems would be damaged if they were to be permitted to turn at excessive speeds. Therefore, units will need to have automatic over-speed governing systems. Some systems use electrical braking systems although some use mechanical type brakes.

The output electricity from the alternator is sent to a controller which conditions it for use in the home. The use of residential wind power systems requires the home to either remain linked with the utility grid or store electricity in a battery for use when the wind doesn’t blow sufficiently.

When the home is tied to the grid, the surplus electricity that is produced by the residential wind power system can be sold to the utility company to lower and sometimes even eliminate your electric bill. During times with not enough wind, the home is supplied power from the utility company.

http://www.residentialwindturbines.org/wind-scheme-grid-tied.gif

The Cost of Wind Energy

Small residential wind power turbines can be an attractive alternative, or addition, to those people needing over 100-200 watts of power for their home, business, or remote facility. Unlike PV’s, which stay at basically the same cost per watt independent of array size, wind turbines get more affordable with increasing system size. At the 50 watt size level, for instance, a small residential power turbine would cost about $8.00/watt in comparison to approximately $6.00/watt for a PV module.

This is the reason, all things being equal, Photo voltaic is less expensive for very small loads. As the system size gets larger, however, this “rule-of-thumb” reverses itself.

At 300 watts the wind generator costs are down to $2.50/watt, while the PV costs are still at $6.00/watt. For a 1,500 watt wind system the cost is down to $2.00/watt and at 10,000 watts the price of a wind generator (excluding electronics) is down to $1.50/watt.

The author – Mary Jones writes for the

http://www.residentialwindturbines.org/”>residential wind generators

website, her personal hobby blog centered on ways to reduce CO2 and lower energy costs using alternative power sources.

If you wish to read my complete Bio:

http://www.residentialwindturbines.org/about

:}

More tomorrow

:}

Buffalo Gnats, Black Flies – I don’t care what you call them

Posted on by
Reply

They have made my life a living hell. The skin area around half of my neck is swollen up three times it normal size and I am in pain…So no real post today. Sorry.

It’s Jam Band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyRshnwExPU

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_fly

Black fly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A black fly (sometimes called a buffalo gnat, turkey gnat, or white socks) is any member of the family Simuliidae of the Culicomorpha infraorder. They are related to the Ceratopogonidae, Chironomidae, and Thaumaleidae. There are over 1,800 known species of black flies (of which 11 are extinct). Most species belong to the immense genus Simulium. Most black flies gain nourishment by feeding on the blood of other animals, although the males feed mainly on nectar. They are usually small, black or gray, with short legs, and antennae. They are a common nuisance for humans, and many U.S. states have programs to suppress the black fly population. They spread several diseases, including river blindness in Africa (Simulium damnosum and S. neavei) and the Americas (Simulium callidum and S. metallicum in Central America, S. ochraceum in Central and South America)

:}

More Monday

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUZYuWfg7NA

:}

Berms In The Gulf Part 2 – Bobby Jindal believes in running around like a chicken with his head cut off

Posted on by
Reply

See Booby Jindal and Billy “the blimp” Nungasser believe that if you run around acting like you’re in charge and “doing something” then voters will think you are an effective leader. But what the “near miss hurricane” showed is that they and their sand barriers are full of crap. Even worse, by insisting that BP hire local unemployed workers as clean up people, the tox results from previous oil spills show that they are also going to lead to people’s deaths. Way to go you two.

An Honest Discussion Of Louisiana’s Berm Plan
Part 2
Construction work in the Chandeleur Islands by Kyle Douglas Jeffery Photography: http://www.kylejeffery.ca/Main/Kyle_Douglas_Jeffery_Photography.html
Restoration Work on the Chandeleur Islands

The shut down on June 23 of part of the state’s dredging operations for construction of offshore sand berms was treated by Governor Jindal as a sudden and arbitrary action by federal agencies. (1) But the reality is somewhat different.

While some media stories conveyed the impression that the state’s entire sand berm plan was approved by the Corps of Engineers in late May, only six sections of the original proposal were given a permit. Two sections to the east of the river, on the upper end of the Chandeleur Island chain, and four sections west of the river were authorized by the Corps, which described them as “critical locations where greater immediate benefit is likely to be achieved with minimal adverse disruption of coastal circulation patterns.” (2)

The Corps Permit specified the source areas for sand/sediment: Ship Shoal, South Pelto, the Mississippi River Offshore Disposal Site, and Pass a Loutre for the western sites, and St. Bernard shoal and Hewes Point for the sites to the east. The location of borrow and dredge sites at the northern end of the Chandeleur Islands has been one of the areas of greatest concern. NOAA and other agencies had pointed out that creating borrow pits or dredging in close proximity to the islands could cause accelerated erosion and even compromise their stability, so using a source site a couple of miles away was a condition of the permit.

Soon after receiving its permit, however, the state began to voice its intention to source near to the islands after all, due to a lack of pipe for pumping sand and mud from a distance. The state said it would replace sand from the dredged site within a few weeks, but federal agencies agreed to this change with a much shorter time limit because of the possible effects on the island.

Despite the Governor’s repeated claims that “we don’t have a day to wait,” the state was not ready for the approved level of dredging even after it was approved. Federal officials said that “the state has been unprepared since the beginning, has caused further delay because it did not have the proper pipe available and has continued to asked for time to shift to the offshore site. According to the Interior Department, it gave the state permission for more than a week to use the closer source of sand while locating the pipe, but that allowing the state to continue dredging could have negative effects on existing barrier islands.” (3)

An official with the Department of Interior noted that if the department had allowed the state to continue digging where it was digging, they feared approaching a “tipping point” with an “impact on that island chain that may never be restored.”(4) The Governor’s reaction was to completely ignore these considerations and instead attack the federal agencies: “We haven’t heard from them before today about any concern about these islands or this area. All of a sudden now that we’re building new land to protect our coast, they’re worried about a hypothetical consequence?” (5)

The Governor may not have heard or read the federal agencies concerns in their response to the state’s permit application, or have seen the U.S. Geological Survey report last year about the status of the Chandeleur Islands and how they could be actually restored in ways that minimize adverse impacts (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5252). He could have read the comments of his own Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, which pointed out in its letter to the Corps the need to “determine whether or not borrow area excavation will increase wave energy and subsequent shoreline erosion, alter littoral currents, or otherwise impact depositional processes, in a way that undermines the sustainability of inland islands, marsh, and shorelines, most importantly the Chandeleur Islands.” (6)

For views of the sand berm and other spill related issues from the perspective of a coastal scientist  please visit the Louisiana Coast Post by Len Bahr, Ph.D. Dr. Bahr is a former LSU marine sciences faculty member who served 18 years as a coastal policy advisor to Louisiana governors from Roemer to Jindal. Dr. Bahr gives the sand berm plan an official “thumbs down” here.

(1) C. Kirkham, Times-Picayune, “Louisiana officials urge feds to let dredging continue on berm to fight Gulf oil spill,” 6/24/10, www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/06/louisiana_officials_again_ask.html.

(2) Documents related to the plan and the state’s permit request to the Corps of Engineers have been posted at http://leanweb.org/images/stories/bpspill/emergency_permit_documents_final.pdf.

(3) C. Kirkham, J. Tilove, Times-Picayune, “State halts dredging of sand for berms,” 6/23/10.

(4) Times-Picayune, 6/24/10.

(5) Times-Picayune, 6/24/10.

(6) Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, letter of 5/13/10, http://leanweb.org/images/stories/bpspill/emergency_permit_documents_final.pdf.

SaveOurGulf.orgVisit SaveOurGulf.org to get more information about the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster from Waterkeeper organizations across the Gulf Coast and donate to Save Our Gulf!

:}

I Promised Will Reynolds This Post – I saw Will last night at Jim’s thing

Posted on by
Reply

Jim Johnston and Sustainable Springfield had the Smart Growth panel last night and I saw Will. A head slap moment occurred immediately, so here are the photos from the HIGH Speed Rail Corridor community input session on MAY 7!!!!! Yup 2 months late.

:}

Sorry for the size issues but it makes the map readable

:}

There is the whole thing. Then there were the key areas of concern. In nor particular order as they say.

:}

This is the last today…the post is getting long and I am still learning the new Word Press system for handling pictures…

:}

More tomorrow Will

:}

Carbon Neutral Houses – They be real cool

Posted on by
Reply

http://www.2people.org/pub/page/show/article/10596

Carbon neutral homes by 2016

The British government has recently opened the comment period on a major plan to revise the building code. The revisions phase in regulations ensuring that all new homes are built carbon-neutral by 2016. Other elements of the plan include:

  • Code for Sustainable Homes: national standard to inform home buyers about the environmental performance of homes offered for sale.
  • Energy Performance Certificates: national standard to inform home buyers about the energy efficiency and running costs of homes offered for sale.
  • Urban planning policy to support lower carbon emissions and resiliency in the face of climate change.
  • Water Efficiency standards
  • Review of Existing Buildings: While the new regulations cover new construction, the government looking at ways to upgrade existing homes and buildings.

:}

http://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/dcs_first_carbon_neutral_home_hits_the_market/1652

DC’s First Carbon Neutral Home Hits the Market

by Mark Wellborn

image

Back in September, we reported that DC’s first carbon neutral home was being built in Capitol Hill. Yesterday, the much-anticipated property hit the market.

The three-bedroom, 3.5-bath home at 19 4th Street NE (map) was gutted and renovated by GreenSpur, Inc., a DC-based building and design firm that uses sustainability techniques to deliver homes that are energy efficient as well as cost effective.

After overcoming a labyrinth of regulatory hurdles and permitting nightmares given the property’s location four blocks from the Capitol, GreenSpur enlarged the home (from 1,000 to 2,100 square feet), hand dug the basement and, in keeping with their mission statement, made it completely green but priced comparably to other (non-carbon neutral) homes in the area.

:}

Then there is this. Wiki makes a political statement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_neutrality

Carbon neutrality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

“Carbon neutral” redirects here. For other uses, see Carbon neutral (disambiguation).
Unbalanced scales.svg
 The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (May 2010)

Carbon neutrality, or having a net zero carbon footprint, refers to achieving net zero carbon emissions by balancing a measured amount of carbon released with an equivalent amount sequestered or offset, or buying enough carbon credits to make up the difference. It is used in the context of carbon dioxide releasing processes, associated with transportation, energy production and industrial processes.

The carbon neutral concept may be extended to include other greenhouse gases (GHG) measured in terms of their carbon dioxide equivalence—the impact a GHG has on the atmosphere expressed in the equivalent amount of CO2. The term climate neutral is used to reflect the fact that it is not just carbon dioxide (CO2), that is driving climate change, even if it is the most abundant, but also encompasses other greenhouse gases regulated by the Kyoto Protocol, namely: methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). Both terms are used interchangeably throughout this article.

Best practice for organizations and individuals seeking carbon neutral status entails reducing and/or avoiding carbon emissions first so that only unavoidable emissions are offset. The term has two common uses:

  • It can refer to the practice of balancing carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels, with renewable energy that creates a similar amount of useful energy, so that the carbon emissions are compensated, or alternatively using only renewable energies that don’t produce any carbon dioxide (this last is called a post-carbon economy).[1]
  • It is also used to describe the practice, criticized by some,[2] of carbon offsetting, by paying others to remove or sequester 100% of the carbon dioxide emitted from the atmosphere[3] – for example by planting trees – or by funding ‘carbon projects‘ that should lead to the prevention of future greenhouse gas emissions, or by buying carbon credits to remove (or ‘retire’) them through carbon trading. These practices are often used in parallel, together with energy conservation measures to minimize energy use.

:}

Climate neutral. Who is zooming who here. Did somebody just make up a phrase to create the new denier strawman. Yah think.

:}

Carbon Neutral Is Different Than Energy Neutral – The difference is subtle but real

Posted on by
1

Energy Neutral is different from Carbon Neutral. Energy Neutral means it produces as much energy as it consumes. Carbon Neutral takes into account all carbon used to make the place and its usage.

http://www.jetsongreen.com/2008/02/lighthouse-uks.html

Lighthouse, UK’s First Zero-Emission, Carbon Neutral Home

Lighthouseuk

In England, a handful of efficient demonstration homes have been built on the grounds of the Building Research Establishment Ltd, including “The Lighthouse,” which is the first net zero carbon house in the UK.  The house is also the first to attain level six in the Code for Sustainable Homes, which indicates that it is carbon neutral. The two-bedroom house is only 93.3 square meters (barely over 1000 sq. ft.) in a 2-1/2 story building.  The building has solar panels and evacuated solar tubes on its roof, as well as making use of passive measures with ventilation chimneys.  It also incorporates rainwater catchment as part of the building design.

The materials used include highly insulated, airtight building fabric which has been designed to provide generous daylight levels and includes effective solar control, together with integrated building services based around a platform of renewable and sustainable technologies. These include water efficiency techniques, renewable energy technologies, passive cooling and ventilation, as well as mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR).

:}

http://greenbuildingelements.com/2008/11/25/how-to-build-a-carbon-neutral-home/

Like this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and stay up to date.

How To Build A Carbon Neutral Home

Written by Reenita Malhotra
Published on November 25th, 2008

Is it possible to build a carbon neutral home? Apparently so says the Australian Home Lifestyle TV show. Watch this segment about green building construction.

Tweet This Post

0diggsdigg

:}

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/08/japans-carbon-neutral-hom_n_111519.html

Your request is being processed…

Japan’s Carbon-Neutral Home: Leave Your Carbon Footprint At The Door

Wall Street Journal:

As leaders of the world’s most powerful nations discuss climate change at the Group of Eight summit in northern Japan, Japan’s big tech companies are displaying some of their most cutting-edge solutions in a nearby “zero emissions house.”

The single-story, 2,152-square-foot house generates all the energy required for a family of four, therefore eliminating carbon-dioxide emissions, according to the Japanese government. Products inside, many already on sale in Japan, include a washer that requires no water and an air conditioner that senses where people are in a room and automatically sends cool air in their direction rather than cooling empty space. Yet the eco-friendly products also carry a steeper price tag than traditional appliances.

The house uses a wind-turbine generator and a photovoltaic generation system, which directly converts light into electricity, to produce about 15 kilowatts of energy a day, nearly five times the amount used by a regular household. The government has presented the house as one of its contributions toward helping the world cut greenhouse emissions in half by 2050.

Read the whole story: Wall Street Journal

As leaders of the world’s most powerful nations discuss climate change at the Group of Eight summit in northern Japan, Japan’s big tech companies are displaying some of their most cutting-edge solutio…
As leaders of the world’s most powerful nations discuss climate change at the Group of Eight summit in northern Japan, Japan’s big tech companies are displaying some of their most cutting-edge solutio…

Filed by Dave Burdick |  Report Corrections

More in Green…

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

More On Energy Neutral Homes – Which is not the same as Carbon Neutral

Posted on by
Reply

Trying to keep my mind off the Gulf….lalalalalalala

http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/06/net-zero-energy-technology-breakthroughs-house.html

Green Tech

The Energy-Neutral Home

Kerry A. Dolan, 11.06.09, 03:30 PM EST

Turning a historic house into an energy sipper.

image

BURLINGAME, Calif. — You might think that a home using zero net energy would be chilly inside. I visited one last night, and it wasn’t. It was a pleasant 72 degrees.

The Palo Alto, Calif., home owned by Marc Porat, an IT-turned-clean-tech entrepreneur, is a showcase of the latest technologies that can be used to ratchet down the amount of energy that homes consume. Porat, who has founded three companies that are developing better, greener building materials–including window and drywall maker Serious Materials–wanted to walk the talk with his own home, a historic 1936 home designed by architect Pedro de Lemos.

A net zero energy house produces as much energy as it consumes over the course of a year. Porat turned to San Francisco home energy retrofitter Sustainable Spaces (which will rename itself Recurve next week) to do the job, which took about two years. Sustainable Spaces’ Adam Winter says that by putting in dense-pack cellulose wall insulation (made from ground up newspapers), changing the heating and air conditioning system to an air-to-water heat pump, improving the ventilation and lighting systems and adding windows that insulate better, his team was able to reduce the amount of energy the home uses by 62%.

:}

lalalalalala

http://www.theenvironmentalblog.org/2007/08/dutch-energy-neutral-homes.html

Dutch Energy Neutral Homes

In the Netherlands, the Dutch have designed new energy neutral homes that actually give back more power to the grid than they consume. This is all being done to reduce man’s impact of climate change on the Earth. In my opinion, more ecological home’s should be built anyway to reduce the harmful effects of pollution from dirty energy sources including coal. Home’s like this one are just the start of a new “green revolution” as the planet realizes that it can no longer take more than it gives back.

All over the world including the UK, the US, even China are starting to see the benefits of going green. Once our grid is capable of supporting more energy neutral or energy returning homes, our generation can only begin to transform. Green technologies and green industries are the economic future of this planet as well. Having less pollution in our atmosphere will almost certainly reduce many types of cancers and other ailments that currently plague the world.

Wouldn’t you like to live in an energy neutral home? I say…sign me up!

:}

More on Monday

:}

Energy Neutral Homes Continues – The Building Council’s site

Posted on by
Reply

Not much to say…great site …great articles…please see:

http://greenhomeguide.com/

Get Optimal Performance from a Tankless Water Heater

September 4, 2009 By Willem Maas

Tankless water heaters have caught the eye of many homeowners lately—as a way to reduce the 19 percent of total home energy use consumed by water heating. According to research sponsored by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), heating water with a tankless system is 12 to 34 percent more energy efficient than using a conventional storage tank system. And when tankless systems are installed at each water outlet, gains in efficiency can range from 28 to 50 percent.

Others are impressed by the ability of tankless systems to deliver hot water “endlessly” in a busy household, as well as the space saved because a storage tank is no longer needed.

These factors, combined with rising energy bills, a federal tax credit for 30 percent of the total cost (up to $1,500, including installation), and greater availability, make tankless a technology well worth considering.

:}

More tomorrow

:}