Slashdot Mirror
Scott Adams On the Difficulty of Building a 'Green' Home
An anonymous reader writes "Scott Adams built himself a new house with the goal of making it as 'green' as possible, and detailed his experience for those interested in following in his missteps. Quoting: '... So the architect — and later your building engineer, too — each asks you to sign a document saying you won't sue them when beavers eat a load-bearing wall and your entire family is crushed by forest debris. You make the mistake of mentioning this arrangement to your family, and they leave you. But you are not deterred because you're saving the planet, damn it. You'll get a new family. A greener one. Your next hurdle is the local planning commission. They like to approve things that are similar to things they've approved before. To do otherwise is to risk unemployment. And the neighbors don't want to live next to a house that looks like a compost pile. But let's say, for the sake of this fascinating story, that everyone in the planning commission is heavily medicated with medical marijuana and they approve your project over the objections of all of your neighbors, except for the beavers, who are suspiciously flexible. Now you need a contractor who is willing to risk his career to build this cutting-edge structure. Good luck with that.'"
"Pioneers usually end up with arrows in their backs" I wish you all the best.
Aren't there better articles that aren't written by a litigious, unfunny cocksmack who fags up the comics world...
Apparently not. I found it quite humorous. It's nice to see some insight into a process like this from someone with a sense of humor and the ability to laugh at things that make him angry.
Now, go get a nice cup of cocoa, take off those grumpy pants and have a nap. Looks like someone needs a little downtime.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Seems the much maligned president owned, with little fanfare, a rather "green" home. Passive solar heating, natural cooling, geothermal energy, modest size, rainwater collection, nature preserve, all made for a model environmentalist domicile. (This in contrast to the fast talking "green" showman whose mansion burned 20x the national average.)
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
They should build green modular homes and deliver them all over the country. A modular home is not a trailer. You can afix it to a permanent foundation, although in many parts of the country you shouldn't do that either.
Much of California, for example, in its infinite government insanity, will not allow you to live in a trailer even in a rural area. Why would I want to live in a trailer, praytell? Well, it'd be nice to think that the next time a nearby hill caught on fire, you could, you know... maybe at least have a fair chance of MOVING THE HOUSE OUT OF THE WAY. Instead, the county insists that you 1. Build a really expensive house and then 2. Permanently cement it to something that will eventually blowtorch it down, wash it away, or shake it apart.
Invariably, when fires occur they strip away trees and reveal more "illegal substandard housing" than anybody ever realized existed. These would be "people who had the right idea". It makes a helluva lot more sense to build a *shack* up there than anything more expensive. If you try to do that, the county will FINE YOU. IMHO, it's the county government that should be fined. If only we had a government by the people, for the people...
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I'm guessing he's not as wealthy as I suspected. If he had real money, he would speak with some manservant and say "take care of this". A few months later he would enter his new green space. I guess being able to say "I'm Al Gore bitches!" carries a bit more sway than being the inventor of Dogbert.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
You don't need a perfect high tech green house.
We could get a lot of bang......for very FEW bucks just using power strips, replacing incandescent light bulbs, drinking tap water and shopping with resuable backs.
Those things aren't enough, but if you could get large numbers of people doing them......and these things are cheap enough to get people to do them, it would be a huge impact
Every single problem he mentions would be the same problem if he was building a "non-green" house. Lack of controls convinces him that he's suffering something out of the ordinary.
Lack of controls also tells me that after an eclipse, the reason the sun returns is that we beat tom-toms.
Advice: on VPS providers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_recovery_ventilation They're becoming increasingly common, particularly in colder climates. In Alaska, many newer homes are so well-sealed that a full air exchange in the house can take days. Properly sized, an HRV can provide just the right level of fresh air, and has the side benefit of recovering some of the heat. (Recovering some of the heat is important! Many areas of Alaska rely primarily on oil for heating. The Anchorage area has an extensive natural gas distribution system, but it's limited in other cities and villages, where it exists at all.)
There was a TED talk that outlined recently why building from scratch is rarely "green". Especially when you're talking about building a big, opulent "green" mansion out in the middle of a posh suburb with a huge acreage.
People (especially the wealthy) may not want to hear it, but the greenest option is to renovate an existing structure in an urban center. Just like buying a used 1992 Honda is more "green" than buying a brand new Prius.
Building new may make you feel better about yourself, but it's definitely not the best option for the environment, by far.
I did some work on my home - added a second story etc. while living in it - an adventure for sure! I learned some things. For one my contractor was a good ole boy who was so honest it wasn't funny. He did it ALL without a signed contract and he stuck to his original price despite having to wait a YEAR to begin! It took a year to get permits and to get the damned architect to properly do the plans, we waited on weather some too. Jackass architect drew in 2X4 walls and not 2X6, not noticed by me till they were banging nails - grr. The first few sets of plans were a joke and the very first time my contractor caught a GLARING error before he even got out of their office. The architect hated my contractor but my contractor knew how to build and was catching all sorts of errors. Thankfully he worked around the ones in the final plans just fine.
So, I wanted to do some odd things my guy hadn't seen before. For starters I had a specific toilet in mind. You know, a low flow toilet that WORKS! Toto Drake for those wondering - just wish it had more water in the bowl so keep a brush handy. He thought it was silly to want a specific toilet and darn it the thing cost MORE. Wow, it works he finds out. Guess who now has two in HIS home :-) I wanted "solar tubes". What in the world are those he wonders. Well the guy puts them in and wow, lots of LIGHT from outside. My contractor thinks this is pretty cool - don't think he's bought any yet. I wanted a tin roof. Now he's seen these and he's had them done. I had a good quote from a guy but when the guy came out to look over the job he made the cardinal sin of ignoring my contractor - this pissed him off. My contractor got his buddy on the phone and shaved multiple thousands of dollars off the price just to spite this jerk - likely burned a favor. Took the guys maybe two hours to put up that roof too. Rolls off the reel through an extruder and up go the panels onto the roof. I wanted spray foam insulation too. Why would I want that? Well the downstairs leaked like a sieve and I wanted it quiet. Research I found said to spray it under the roof decking and make the attic a controlled space. Contractor and roofing guy not happy, insulation guy not so sure. Govt. studies say this saves money bigtime but if the roof decking gets too hot and fries I'm out big bux. Never mind that Govt study was partially conducted in Florida. I relent but I still have the stuff in my walls and attic - it rocks! My contractor also does Tyvek wrap, rigid foam with foil, and the insulator guys sealed every nook with caulk too. End result is awesome but pricey. Insulator says they never do this in homes but in businesses all the time. A/C and heating guy nearly passed out when I told him what we had for insulation - my heat pump doesn't have to work at all but is sized for efficiency. Tankless hot water heater and softener system. Why would I do that? Well endless hot water for the big tub I had installed and the efficiency is off the chart compared to the previous somewhat new water heater. Literally - the two charts don't overlap the new one is so good! I wanted good windows - Pella is what I chose. All sorts of coatings and stuff. I had gotten a ballpark at a homeshow on price. Pella only sells through regional dealers if you buy their good stuff - price is sky high. My contractor is NOT happy and talks them down a couple hundred per window. Love this guy! I get a seriously good attic trap door with insulation and gasketed seals - everyone thinks I'm nuts till that sucker goes up and seals like a drum. I wanted good temp compensating shower fixtures - I buy them online for way less than local. Plumber freaks at the puzzle he has to build to plumb it. I use a local tile and granite guy instead of a big box store or boutique bath place. I save TONS and the guy is very happy to have my business - I've been back for more stuff twice.
So in the end I saved a bunch and obviously went over budget. Every single time I wanted to do something "odd" I got questioned and quizzed. If you aren't
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
actually, with well designed argon filled double pane windows, your windows will transmit less heat *than the surrounding walls* white roofs make a huge difference (just ask anyone who has to run ethernet cable through attics in the summer in the southwest, dark roof = miserable, light roof = not so bad). insulation is not as cheep as you think.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
Most people waste inordinate amounts of water, which takes resources to purify both before and after it's used, since any that isn't absorbed goes to run-off to the sewers, which needs to be treated in most areas. Then you get pesticide use, herbicide use, chemical fertilizers, gas-powered lawnmowers, etc. How the hell can you possibly think a conventional lawn is good for the environment? A properly cared-for garden? Kick-ass. Your average suburban lawn? Fucks up the environment.
Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
For example windows are not that bad energy losers
I beg to differ. If you are looking for enery loss guidelines, the rule of thumb is the best window is the same as the worst wall.
Insulation costs next to nothing
Really? Ever try and make an R40 roof or R20 wall? Not ridiculous, but not nothing either.
Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
Both are easily avoided with a little forethought as to location and distance from main roads
Of course, if you build your green house out in the boonies, and then have to commute 50 miles to get to work every day, you probably haven't done the environment any favors.
Clearly the trick is to be a cartoonist, so you can work at home and send in your work product by email each day.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Your average 1200 sq ft bungalow needs 6880 square feet of r20 insulation (a little less since you can take stud width out, but you usually leave that in and just come up a few bags over)
That means properly insulated, r40 roof, r40 floor and r20 walls. Average bag of insulation should be around $35 CAD or $30 USD and does about 50 square feet on the average(usually a bit less, and the reason you leave in the stud widths if using regular lumber). So in total you need about 138 bags of insulation to do it right. Grand total cost is around 5k CAD or a bit less USD and you'll save enough in AC/Heat in the first 3 years in most places to be in money from doing it, so any argument about up front capital cost is moot as average time spent in a purchased home before selling is well over 3 years, at least in Canada. Especially when you consider average house cost is over 100k(a lot over 100k in some cases), even for that modest bungalow. 5k isn't much to tack on when theres already 100k going into the place.
Thats not including your basement if it exists but a good vapour barrier and 2 layers of R7 1.5 inch styro around all of the interior cement, a good water barrier on the outside and a good sealer and sub floor on the cement floor will remove the r40 floor as a necessity(probably still want to do r20 just for sound reasons, at least, I know I would) and cover the insulation needs the same. Shit, an uninsulated basement is probably the #1 cause of overpaying on heat bills, again, in canada, but I can't imagine its much different south of the border. I've had people cut their heat bills in half with just the double styro insulation around the cement.
The absolute worst part here in Southern California is all of this lawn we've got. They use some Norman Rockwell grade grass that looks exactly like what you expect grass to look like, but is a bitchass to maintain. It has to be watered literally every day, and if the Santa Ana winds (dry and hot and fast) blow in unexpectedly, whole swathes of that stuff just go brown overnight and die. They replace it within a week most times, but the waste! Oh my God, the waste! And nobody ever walks on it, so all of that is useless.
What they really should do is plant those gorgeous native grasses everywhere - hillocks of green, literally shining (for some reason parts of it are silver from certain angles), doesn't need much watering (because it's native grass, it's used to how often it rains down here), doesn't die off if the weather changes unexpectedly, and grows in uneven little hills so people won't walk on it as much.
Basically, if companies didn't insist on having Norman Rockwell style lawns, we could use a shitload less water and things would look a lot nicer too.
Their carbon footprint is the size of their feet. They recycle things, like food, that are not considered recyclable. They are the model of future green. They are also the fastest growing segment of the population.
The frustrating thing about reading Scott Adams' article, though, is just how many mistakes he made. Siting his house without planning for solar gain. Not hiring an experienced energy consultant. Not hiring people who knew what they were doing, basically. Building a green house is difficult--you have to do a lot of research. Unfortunately, very few builders know how to build one. But there are builders who do it for a living. So if you want a green house, and you don't want to build it yourself, hire one of *them*, not some builder who doesn't know anything about it and thinks it's a bad idea.
The whole sad saga of the attic fan was the worst of it. Has he never heard of a vented roof? A cupola to draw wind up, or a peak vent that does the same? Most green building techniques are just what everybody did before air conditioning was invented. Back when you couldn't cool a house with refrigeration, you *had* to make it energy-efficient, because the only thing cooling the house was going to be whatever passive environmental system you were able to come up with.
Yes, A guy who actually has DONE it is probably far less informed than random people on the internet quoting numbers.
PS. Ever own a house? Sure, my double-pane windows rock ... the casings, on the other hand, leak like a sieve.
Actually, he was less informed. Take that from someone who has done all sorts of construction. The fact that he has missteps and made bad choices does not mean it's not doable, nor does it mean it's not economically feasible. As some for instances, there are various utility companies who will not pay money for power generated. You still get a bill for what you use though. Oh, wait, that's not legal. Yep! Ask BGE why, they tell you that though it is the law that they have to buy power from you, that there is no law yet that tells them how they are supposed to do it. Until then, they aren't paying anyone (at least not as of the last time I checked - by now, enough people may have made a stink to force them to follow the law). Our friend just had an installation done that cost him $6000 after rebates (because it was done right), and we've started on ours. Much of the time, he's selling back to the electric company (which our current one, fortunately, does properly buy power back and credit you for it).
Take the insulation... there are tons of new insulation, lab tested, R value and all, all eco-friendly - oops, guess he simply made a bad choice there too. Take the solar. Oddly, most people who install them get enough rebates that the system can be paid for in 5 years... not 15. Of course, if one does it wrong, there are a lot less rebates (or none). The system has to be able to generate a certain amount of electricity during each season - if not (because you stuck it under trees, in the shade, or facing the wrong direction), then you aren't eligible for a lot of (or any) rebates. Take his other suggestions (stone walls... btw, they work great on the outside too... no reason to have a living room with a stone wall), thick slab foundation, and so on... duh! Sounds like he forgot those and realized them as an "ooops, here's what you should consider which would have made things better for us had we considered it"
Should I go on? Also, green homes do not need to be ugly. Wanna know how you can cut costs? Get good appliances. And no, I dont mean the top of the line "crap" sold at your local appliance store (Sears, Home Depot, Lowes, wherever). They make full size refrigerators that use 200W - NOT 1200W. Similar (electricity) savings can be found on other appliances as well. Ensure you have entirely LED or CFL lighting. Once you are done, during spring and summer, how much electricity is it to run a house? Let's see... 200-300W for the fridge, 20 lights at 3W is another 60W, plus the incidentals. During summer, use cooling from a heat/cooling pump (pumps coolant into a ground chamber, comes out at 55 degrees or so... inotherwords, ideal to drop the house temperature to something nice - or to something cool with AC using a LOT less electricity). In the winter, the same can be done to "warm" the water before it's used to heat the house. Things like floor heating, when not needed, can simply be a flow valve away from being removed from the loop - and since the lines are filled with "antifreeze" (a chemical like it), no worries about it freezing and busting a pipe (c'mon, this flow valve idea is common sense - people use stuff like that all the time for lawn sprinklers that have multi-zones, for ponds and fish pools and more). As for the lawn, one can use runoff, if one builds a cistern or some other containment. People are already doing that, and collecting enough in most areas like his, to water a full lawn, and have water extra for toilets, and an overflow for when it gets too full.
Well, I could keep going on and on. Honestly, he made mistakes (BIG ones), read the wrong magazines/websites, and is complaining (whining?) about it now.
StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
The truth is there are Many Scientists
My friend, on page 45 of said book, Soloman states quite clearly that human beings are causing climate change.
So... what's your point again?
PS: There is a difference between science and propaganda. Epistemology is the philosophy of how you know something for certain. A person with 60 IQ points could work out that the nile is a river in egypt.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
The author spends quite a bit of time making good natured jokes of his personal experience and unfortunately (well meaning as he appears to be) drops in some rather misleading information. The German Passivhaus standard is a type of house he could have considered. The standard was implemented in 1996 (predicated on some work done on project houses in Saskatchewan Canada in 1977, as well as in Massachusetts, and also by the University of Illinois) is readilly achievable, even in very cold climates (like colder parts of Germany, Austria and Alberta Canada. Windows do not have to be some energy leaking sieves at all. Good windows require thermal breaks and should be triple glazed. South facing windows are large for heat gain in winter months and canopied for blocking high summer rays.
These houses basically - and readilly (with installed solar systems including Photovoltaic and Solar Hot Water, achieve a "Net Zero" energy requirement: In the span of one year on average, and all within their property envelope (urban settings too) they produce an amount of energy equal to, or more than ("Net Positive"), the energy they consume. That also requires choosing energy efficent appliances (fridges can be power hogs otherwise) that consume low Killowat hours of energy. LED lights are excellent. induction cookers as well. The key thing on Passivhaus design is that the house has a very high R-value all round (walls can be a foot thick of insulation and roofs are R 80) and the house must be air-sealed to a specific blower door pressure test stardard.
Passivhauses do not have to look like bunkers or lunar outposts by necessity. The Mill Creek Net Zero home in Alberta is one pleasing example, or this example in Salem, Oregon. Because the houses are so well sealed (in contrast to regular built houses that leak air badly), air exchangers are a necessity and key to having fresh air. One of the benefits of a passivhaus is that the air is extremely fresh. To save conserve space heating energy heat recovery ventillators are used. Some heat recovery ventillators can be anywhere from 95 to 99% efficient. In some cases - even in cold climates, the passivhaus standard built house actually doesn't need an auxilliary heating system, but the City officials can get a little freaked out and demand one anyway. Germany has many of these houses. Passivhauses can also work in hot climates as well.
Anecdotes are fun. I have a friend in Fairbanks (a poet) who built a cabin, quite literally, with his own two hands. The doors, triple-pane windows, everything are hand-built. His two-story cabin (probably 600 sf total) warms in about 30 minutes once his wood stove is started. He collects 4 cords or wood each summer, and every third or fourth year he has enough left over that he doesn't need to collect that one year. It's an amazingly tight place. (He once bragged that his 6-candle candelabra keeps the place comfortable at -30F.)
Like your Finnish homeowner, my friend has very thick doors, with tight wool gaskets to match. The roof is about R-60 in the summer, and because the snow doesn't melt on top, gets much more insulating in the winter. No water and an outhouse make the cabin somewhat too rugged for more conventional folks to raise kids in, though.
. . . I don't think that I know anybody with a "greener" house than his, though.
Thanks for the ego trip. The guy obviously talked to a lot of people, some of them surely more knowledgeable than you are. The problem , as me mentions, is that people don't agree on what is a good idea. You seem to be giving questionable advice just like he was given. Don't use the wattage of refrigerator to determine the energy use . That's the power consumed when its on. The 200W fridges are unlikely to be energy efficient because they have to run constantly to keep up (if they do keep up). Insulation matters too. Look at rated kWh per year. The rates are published.
According to this Wired article, it takes 113 million BTUs to make a Prius: http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/16-06/ff_heresies_09usedcars
They claim that is about 1000 gallons of gasoline (not really willing to do the math myself, I'll accept it). They also argue that the smelting of the 30 lbs of nickel used for the batteries is very bad for the environment. Also, don't know one way or another, but it wouldn't surprise me.
For some reason you chose to compare a 1992 Honda wagon to a Prius. Well, when I say "for some reason" I meant, because it makes your argument look good. Since the parent just said 1992 Honda, I'll go with the Civic hatchback with manual transmission that gets 33/42 mpg for similar reasons.
So now the Honda is using 2790 gallons of fuel and the Prius (taking into consideration production costs) is using 3800.
Buying a used car (and not being stupid about it) *is* more energy efficient than buying a new car.
you're claiming that Obama set up the regulatory structure that lead to (I presume) the disaster in the Gulf?
I'm saying that he let the regulatory structure that was there wither
How? What did he do to reduce the quality of the regulation covering offshore drilling? Perhaps you believe that by not improving the regulation that this constitutes a whithering effect.
It's as much about what you don't do as what you do.
Are yes, you do. In that case, why make this a partisan argument against Barack Obama? Surely then you should attribute eight times more blame to the previous administration, given that they had eight years compared to Obama's one.
Actually George W Bush was more responsible for the incident because his administration had the opportunity to avert this problem and actively decided against implementing additional safety features. In 2003 the Minerals Management Service considered requiring remote controlled shut-off switches for drilling rigs. They decided against forcing them to install the devices because they cost too much.
Perhaps if they had gone the other way (against the wishes of big business) then this would have been just a workplace accident rather than a major environmental catastrophe.
As for Obama, he didn't have much time to think much about offshore drilling operations because he came into the presidency in the middle of the GFC. Or do you think he somehow caused that too?
People who tend to tell others how to live rarely live as such. Those who live right tend to not brag about it. You have the cynical conclusion. The natural conclusion is to live like the guy with the green home and ignore the guy in the mansion.
I would love to see a President with a sound environmental policy, however what one person declares as sound another dismisses as not enough. Bush did fine considering the history of our past Presidents. Some areas are flash points for one group or another and both will use such to disclaim any leader.
No, given what we know about the two men in question, I would invite the guy from Crawford over to dinner, more than likely the other guy wouldn't even deem to acknowledge the request.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
This has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read. It's comparable in stupidity to the equally stupid far left commentators who blamed Bush for 9/11. I'm no fan of GWB, but blaming a man for a disaster than happened within a year or two of his taking office is just insane. It takes time to realign Federal bureaucracy. In the case of 9/11 the blame lies as much or more with Clinton, Bush Sr. and even Reagan as with GWB. More really, GWB *might* have improved the non-traditional intelligence community had he been given a chance (he probably wouldn't have, but it's moot since he wasn't given the opportunity). Same thing here. Obama inherited a broken regulatory system and hasn't had a chance to fix it (again, he may or may not have actually done so if the disaster hadn't happened, we'll never know now).
Presidents are responsible for the things that happen on their watch, certainly. In both cases the President took responsibility, and vowed to fix what was broken (success or failure not withstanding), but that doesn't mean it was the current President's fault. Being stuck with the bag doesn't make you a bank robber, though it makes you responsible for some of the consequences of the bank robbery.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.