Slashdot Mirror
NASA Unveils Greenest Federal Building In the Nation
An anonymous reader writes "NASA just unveiled its new Sustainability Base — an exceptionally efficient building that harnesses technology developed for the International Space Station. The high-tech complex produces more energy than it consumes and it was just awarded LEED Platinum certification, making it the greenest federal building in the nation. The project features an extensive network of wireless sensors that allow the building to automatically react to changes in weather and occupancy and NASA's forward-osmosis water recycling system, which cuts water use by 90% compared to a traditional building."
This should stick in the craw of those luddites that believe Space Tech doesn't have any use on Earth!
Everyone knows that the solar panels consume far more energy in their production than they ever produce in their lifetime
Completely bogus. It takes maybe 1-4 years to recoup the energy cost of construction, and the panels can last 30 years.
There will be no red or blue pixels on any display used in the building, and no greyscale shit either. Just imagine the glorious greenish glow from all those high-tech CRTs which can be got cheap from almost any landfill...
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Everyone knows that the solar panels consume far more energy in their production than they ever produce in their lifetime
Completely bogus. It takes maybe 1-4 years to recoup the energy cost of construction, and the panels can last 30 years.
When you look at not just your "source", but the source's source, over at http://alpha.chem.umb.edu/chemistry/ch471/evans%20files/Net_Energy%20solar%20cells.pdf
You will find it's not as simple as you make it out to be.
"However, it should be noted that the above payback periods assume that the modules are always operated at their maximum power points [5], as with a maximum power point tracker. It is also assumed that no photovoltaic power is wasted or dumped, as would sometimes occur in many stand-alone systems, such as those using battery storage"
Solar panels are NOT working at their maximum power point during most days of the year. Not even close to half of it, actually. The time to "recoup" the production energy will be significantly longer than you or the Wikipedia "summary" imply.
NASA's forward-osmosis water recycling system, which cuts water use by 90% compared to a traditional building.
You are drinking your own urine.
And whatever other urine they can find.
On the plus side, the entire process renders the building water orange and tastes like Tang.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Sorry, the truth isnt nearly as cleancut as either of you want to make it.
It takes up to 4 years assuming constant peak utilisation according to the source you point to. Constant peak utilisation is obviously an extremely unrealistic assumption.
More plausible usage patterns would result in longer times to break even. In practice tropical installations with well chosen location can get close to that. Marginal usage cases may never recoup in that sense at all though. Economically it can still make sense for other reasons, of course, but that is hardly 'green' if that has any meaning other than being a silly codeword for politically correct.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
When there was a article posted about the NASA's bias against science to promote the Green agenda; someone remarked that NASA should stick to Aerospaceâ¦. I agreed with that; even if I knew from first hand knowledge of the bias.
While I understand there is going to be spin off technologies from the Space program, I would rather they focus on their primary responsibilities.
The article claims it's the world's greenest building, but from the pictures it looks kinda blue, steely and clear for the most part.
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
The first bio dome failed because the concrete consumed more oxygen then was previously believed. The facility never produced enough oxygen even to cure the concrete and thus couldn't be sealed.
NASA should build a bio dome that can be sealed. People don't need to live in it all the time. Use airlocks so people can go home at the end of the day. The point is that the facility should produce enough air, clean water, power, and food to keep five or more people alive indefinitely.
Once we can build such a facility we can theoretically set up bases on the moon or other planets. We might even consider keeping the plants alive entirely with artificial light since regular light cycles won't be useful on other worlds. We might have to turn geothermal energy into light or even use a fission reactor.
I don't care if nasa built an environmentally friendly building. That has nothing to do with space exploration. Want to impress me? Build something that produces more oxygen then the occupants consume.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
You are eating someone's shit, breathing someone's farts, eating someone's rotting corpse and drinking someone's pee. Welcome to the wonderful world of nature. (Plants grow on fertilizer (shit), oxygen is the bad breath of plants, meat and plants are dead bodies, and every bit of water has been through someone's digestive track).
Always strikes me as funny that people who would happily pay a fortune for the right to drink from a spring that a bear shat in but refuse to drink tap water that has been filtered and monitored to hell and back. You were made from dirt, eat dirt and will become the dirt in someone elses cycle of life. Enjoy!
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
From NASA's site it looks like the majority of power comes from an on-site fuel cell.
That's a bit like me building a big garage, installing a big-ass natural gas generator and saying my building returns power to the grid.
Now yes, fuel cells are better than natural gas, but it's still not the building producing it's own power. It's a small power plant on the same lot as the building
You math is a bit off: 25 000 000 / 55 000 = 454.545455
But even "significantly longer" is infinitely better than "never", so for those keeping score, the AC who said,
...is completely full of shit.
You are welcome on my lawn.
There are bike racks on both sides of the front door, and only 3 SUVs in the parking lot.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Is meaningless, or at least misleading. A coal power station produces more energy than it consumes. If that's intrinsically green, then we should be building more coal power stations.
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
Not if they break? You're going to have to cite some really impressive failure rates for anyone to think you're not just grasping at straws.
Never heard of wood?
Ever heard of fire?
Wooden office buildings haven't been in vogue for about 150 years or so.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Why don't you ask all the people in Germany whose solar panels have already paid for themselves?
You are welcome on my lawn.
It's true for the high-end space-ready panels intended for satellites (as used on satellites). When news of that hit the climate denial blogs, every anti-environmentalist idiot out there assumed it applies to all solar panels.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I read the papers (http://alpha.chem.umb.edu/chemistry/ch471/evans%20files/Net_Energy%20solar%20cells.pdf). They assume slightly below average conditions for a variety of different areas, and different types of cells. The worst scenario was still under five years for payback.
You keep stating "assuming constant peak utilisation according to the source." The source doesn't assume this.
I wonder if this new building really is a new building, or is it an "extension?"
Some snips from Wayne Hale, former Space Shuttle program manager
http://waynehale.wordpress.com/
Construction of Facilities, February 26, 2012
A long standing federal law states that any new buildings must be approved by the Congress; any new building must be its own separate line item in the Federal Budget. This is to make sure that the legislators know exactly what is being built on Federal property; to ensure that money is properly spent and not wasted. ...officers and enlisted, who served at Fort Laramie in the late 19th century.
Every year the post commander would propose building 4 or 5 new officer’s houses, and every year Congress would strike those line items from the Federal budget. No new houses. Until one year, he had a really ingenious idea. He proposed that since the army was often in the field pursuing the “hostiles” that the government should construct four “field kitchens” to feed the men. Then, the commandant used the maintenance budget and the free labor of the troops during the winter months to build “extensions” on those “field kitchens”.
True in the 1880’s, true in the 1990’s, and still true today; it is no so much following the rules as it is finding a way to get what needs to be done in spite of the rules.
In fact, in Federal installations all around the country, I have encountered “additions” that were bigger than the original building. Makes you wonder about the effectiveness of a rule that was probably written in the 18th century.
So my advice to anybody trying to get things done in the byzantine maze of Federal regulations is to get creative. There is almost always a way to accomplish the mission in spite of the obstacles. Sometimes it pays to study history because other clever people have gotten their mission accomplished by perfectly legal and legitimate ways to work through the regs.
for more see, http://waynehale.wordpress.com/ Construction of Facilities, February 26, 2012
mfwright@batnet.com
"This building is in Mountain View California. The climate does not require much from a building to maintain the interior temps"
You must not live in CA. Up in San Fran, middle of July, that bay can freeze over.
Mountain View is not very far from San Fran, and shares the same bay.
Try again when you're a resident of the area and know the weather.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.