• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Building homes that make more power than they take

No, these are townhouses. A townhouse is a single or two story unit that shares 2 common walls with the adjacent units. So, yes, I have a roof but CC&Rs preclude modification. I never thought of our rate as cheap but you made me look and you are right. Of course, my LED bulbs have a long payoff rate also but I like to be "greenish" if not "green".

Newer construction offers Energy Star homes but all the new houses are in BFE and I'm a inner city type. I live in walking distance of UNLV and the CC Library. This area, "East Las Vegas" was built out from the 60s through the 90s.

My unit is 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths, 2 story, 1220 SF. I also own and rent 8 other units in the same complex, smallest 1048 SF.

I also replaced my windows with dual pane gas filled more because of noise (I'm in a perimeter unit) than power but it helps.


In Vegas?

Do you have a roof? I know some condo's only have ceilings and someone else has a roof, and I love condo living. I assume your association pays for ourdoor lighting. The issue with Vegas is your juice is SO CHEAP that solar does not pay. Solar will cost about .20/.23 cents a kilowatt hour to produce (over 20 years). You are probably paying .12? So solar makes no sense. There are people in California paying .52 a kilowatt hour for extremely large homes so solar makes plenty of sense for them.
 
If you have a set budget for a house, you either chose 1 foot thick poured concrete walls, geo-thermal heat and cooling, triple pained windows, solar panels, and air-tight construction - or a BIGGER "conventionally built" house that has none of the above.

That's the choices. No debate on that.

I'm not asking if things can be done that are more energy efficient. That's a given.

But it's not the question.


Carry on please. :mrgreen::2wave:
 
No, these are townhouses. A townhouse is a single or two story unit that shares 2 common walls with the adjacent units. So, yes, I have a roof but CC&Rs preclude modification. I never thought of our rate as cheap but you made me look and you are right. Of course, my LED bulbs have a long payoff rate also but I like to be "greenish" if not "green".

Newer construction offers Energy Star homes but all the new houses are in BFE and I'm a inner city type. I live in walking distance of UNLV and the CC Library. This area, "East Las Vegas" was built out from the 60s through the 90s.

My unit is 3 bedrooms, 1.5 baths, 2 story, 1220 SF. I also own and rent 8 other units in the same complex, smallest 1048 SF.

I also replaced my windows with dual pane gas filled more because of noise (I'm in a perimeter unit) than power but it helps.

Dual pane windows are a huge energy saver and probably the most efficient bang for the buck upgrade anyone can do. I have heard about the gas filled thing but don't know enough about that to have an opinion.
 
If you have a set budget for a house, you either chose 1 foot thick poured concrete walls, geo-thermal heat and cooling, triple pained windows, solar panels, and air-tight construction - or a BIGGER "conventionally built" house that has none of the above.

That's the choices. No debate on that.

I'm not asking if things can be done that are more energy efficient. That's a given.

But it's not the question.


Carry on please. :mrgreen::2wave:

Bigger houses use more resources to build though and if you are the green type that should factor into your decision on house size.
 
Great Idea and I am all for using existing roof tops rather than bull dozing deserts for massive solar farms.

Well right now we bulldozer massive parts of the desert for coal that is used to power steam plants for electricity- I'd rather more solar farms than massive pits in the ground with their massive mounds of waste.

That said I never liked the all or nothing approach- be it the method of powering the production to location of production. Having houses that help reduce the need for power shipped in from afar sounds great, but so does a few massive solar/wind farms. There is a tipping point between economy of scale and lost in transmission. One thing that was tested and seemed to work out here is co-gen. The local drywall plant gives off massive amounts of steam as part of the process. The local electric company fought for years but finally now accepts electricity made from the waste steam into the grid. by no means a solution to the energy problem but I think part of our problem is we don't see a need to be efficient.

I think that is what President Obama meant by making power cost more- when something is dear we tend to economize as well as look to less spectacular solutions. Scavenging power from waste isn't glamorous, but could be a lot more profitable than bigger and deeper holes in the desert for coal.
 
The wind tower is my favorite. Are you doing the underground "feeder" as well?Where you dig a long trench and bury a big clay pipe with a shady inlet that comes in at the bottom of the house. Air is drawn in and cooled by the 62(?) underground temp by the wind tunnel. I've seen a setup where they had no underground but set up passive swamp cooling at floor level using the wind tower air draw. Worked pretty good for only the small water pump power.

I WISH! The wife is too afraid of creepy crawlies coming in. (yeah I know but try and tell her!) Well that and the possibility of a dank or moldy smell if moisture builds up in the pipes.

Wimmens!!! :roll:
 
Wind power just isn't practical in my area. the 270 or whatever it is AGL average wind speed doesn't make it feasible or reliable. Maybe if people were to install smaller do it yourself kits they could pick up some marginal savings on windy days or if solar kits come down in price they could do the same. The market has really adjusted on the efficiency side with appliances and insulation as they are common sense, consumer friendly affordable choices. Right now none of the personal generation systems really fit that bill other than perhaps the external wood furnaces but they are still like $10K and require lots of wood.
 
The argon (?) gas between the panes adds very little to the price. In a demonstration with a heat lamp, the difference was significant. Well worth the extra 10% of cost. Plus, lifetime guarantees including breakage sealed the deal.



Dual pane windows are a huge energy saver and probably the most efficient bang for the buck upgrade anyone can do. I have heard about the gas filled thing but don't know enough about that to have an opinion.
 
"Green type" or not it's a relatively simple question.

Bigger, less efficient, 1990-ish style house

-or-

Smaller, extremely efficient, 2013 technology
 
...I will be given approximately $500 for the next 25 years. After that time, the panels will belong to me.

I don't want to disappoint you but the lifespan of those photo-voltaic panels is about 25 years, so probably they won't last much longer than that.
 
I don't want to disappoint you but the lifespan of those photo-voltaic panels is about 25 years, so probably they won't last much longer than that.

I realize that. They will probably be outdated. No big whoop.
 
Dual pane windows are a huge energy saver and probably the most efficient bang for the buck upgrade anyone can do. I have heard about the gas filled thing but don't know enough about that to have an opinion.

Theyre good, but the gas leaks out over time.

Low-E coatings are also good but don't work for passive solar, better to use roof shading to keep sunlight oit in the summer.
 
I don't want to disappoint you but the lifespan of those photo-voltaic panels is about 25 years, so probably they won't last much longer than that.

And aren't likely to pay for themselves over than lifetime. It isn't just an environmental issue. It is also an economic one.
 
Well right now we bulldozer massive parts of the desert for coal that is used to power steam plants for electricity- I'd rather more solar farms than massive pits in the ground with their massive mounds of waste.
That said I never liked the all or nothing approach- be it the method of powering the production to location of production. Having houses that help reduce the need for power shipped in from afar sounds great, but so does a few massive solar/wind farms. There is a tipping point between economy of scale and lost in transmission. One thing that was tested and seemed to work out here is co-gen. The local drywall plant gives off massive amounts of steam as part of the process. The local electric company fought for years but finally now accepts electricity made from the waste steam into the grid. by no means a solution to the energy problem but I think part of our problem is we don't see a need to be efficient.

I think that is what President Obama meant by making power cost more- when something is dear we tend to economize as well as look to less spectacular solutions. Scavenging power from waste isn't glamorous, but could be a lot more profitable than bigger and deeper holes in the desert for coal.

I'd rather see less of both and roofs across America with solar panels on them.
 
I would vote for a home such as mentioned in the OP. A word of caution, however. Don't forget that corpgov rules the nation. If you think for a moment that power companies are going to let you benefit without kissing their ring, think again. We live in a corprotacracy. Big business always gets its cut anymore in America and if you think you'll be able to slide away from corpgov's control scott-free you are wrong. When corporations see that they might lose the upper hand they write laws and force policy changes that benefit them.

You would think that everyone in Arizona would have solar energy. We have more sun that the sun. Solar conversion costs more than it used to. You don't get the tax breaks you once did here in Arizona and now this:

Arizona Public Service Co. is proposing charging customers who install rooftop solar panels $50 to $100 or more a month to cover the cost of maintaining the power grid.

What? Yep. At the present this is a proposal. :roll: Yeah, right. And my butt ain't Irish pink. Arizona is a GOP/Tea Party state and that means big business pretty much gets whatever it wants. Will the proposed monthly increases be charged to solar power users who are connected to the grid? Bet on it.
 
I would vote for a home such as mentioned in the OP. A word of caution, however. Don't forget that corpgov rules the nation. If you think for a moment that power companies are going to let you benefit without kissing their ring, think again. We live in a corprotacracy. Big business always gets its cut anymore in America and if you think you'll be able to slide away from corpgov's control scott-free you are wrong. When corporations see that they might lose the upper hand they write laws and force policy changes that benefit them.

You would think that everyone in Arizona would have solar energy. We have more sun that the sun. Solar conversion costs more than it used to. You don't get the tax breaks you once did here in Arizona and now this:

Arizona Public Service Co. is proposing charging customers who install rooftop solar panels $50 to $100 or more a month to cover the cost of maintaining the power grid.

What? Yep. At the present this is a proposal. :roll: Yeah, right. And my butt ain't Irish pink. Arizona is a GOP/Tea Party state and that means big business pretty much gets whatever it wants. Will the proposed monthly increases be charged to solar power users who are connected to the grid? Bet on it.

What a load of BS.

What, you don't think the electrical grid needs to be maintained? You don't think those union linemen need to be paid?

Who do you think is going to pay for all the green energy solar panels and wind turbines?
 
What a load of BS.

What, you don't think the electrical grid needs to be maintained? You don't think those union linemen need to be paid?

Who do you think is going to pay for all the green energy solar panels and wind turbines?

Ahhh, gee I don't know. Let me take a wild guess and say consumers of grid produced energy. :roll:
 
I would vote for a home such as mentioned in the OP. A word of caution, however. Don't forget that corpgov rules the nation. If you think for a moment that power companies are going to let you benefit without kissing their ring, think again. We live in a corprotacracy. Big business always gets its cut anymore in America and if you think you'll be able to slide away from corpgov's control scott-free you are wrong. When corporations see that they might lose the upper hand they write laws and force policy changes that benefit them.

You would think that everyone in Arizona would have solar energy. We have more sun that the sun. Solar conversion costs more than it used to. You don't get the tax breaks you once did here in Arizona and now this:

Arizona Public Service Co. is proposing charging customers who install rooftop solar panels $50 to $100 or more a month to cover the cost of maintaining the power grid.

What? Yep. At the present this is a proposal. :roll: Yeah, right. And my butt ain't Irish pink. Arizona is a GOP/Tea Party state and that means big business pretty much gets whatever it wants. Will the proposed monthly increases be charged to solar power users who are connected to the grid? Bet on it.

I guess charging people with solar panels to maintain the power grid is kind of like taxing people with elec cars to help maintain the roads they drive on. The money for the infrastructure has to come from somewhere and if you live in AZ you can pretty easily tell the power company to go screw itself and just go off grid.
 
Ahhh, gee I don't know. Let me take a wild guess and say consumers of grid produced energy. :roll:

And that would be those who can see streets at night, or appreciate the safety provided by stop lights as well as other electrified public wonders.

Do you think drivers of electric vehicles charged with power generated exclusively by their own renewable energy sources are going to escape big registration fees one day?

Do you think gasoline taxes aren't going to double or quadruple when average fuel economy reaches 50 mpg?

I guess you would see all that as some big right wing corporatacracy conspiracy.
 
And that would be those who can see streets at night, or appreciate the safety provided by stop lights as well as other electrified public wonders.

Do you think drivers of electric vehicles charged with power generated exclusively by their own renewable energy sources are going to escape big registration fees one day?

Do you think gasoline taxes aren't going to double or quadruple when average fuel economy reaches 50 mpg?

I guess you would see all that as some big right wing corporatacracy conspiracy.

Good point as to why holier than thou off grid hippie types that say they are so green really are not. The business they work at, the stop lights they stop at, the lighted streets etc make them as big as participant in power production as everyone else. The power you use in your home is a drop in the bucket really.
 
Good point as to why holier than thou off grid hippie types that say they are so green really are not. The business they work at, the stop lights they stop at, the lighted streets etc make them as big as participant in power production as everyone else. The power you use in your home is a drop in the bucket really.

The greatest single user of energy is public buildings. However, the typical population density of those public buildings makes them generally more efficient than a persons home.

Of course, to the hippie, off the grid types, I wonder how they square the grid tied energy required to manufacture all the cool mother nature like things they have around their off the grid homes.

The thing is, massive dollars are going to need to be spent, and is being spent, to upgrade the grid. Wait till word of the Smart Grid gets out, with the ability of the utilities to communicate with appliances in each persons home. Imagine, they will get to decide if your home is warm or cold enough, and be able to do something about it.

Of course, that's a whole different subject.
 
Building homes that make more power than they take

If you had the money, would you buy a smaller house that's built to be as "energy independent" as the ones described above, or would you opt for a bigger "conventional" house like the ones most of us have grown up in?



I would definitely go with smaller and energy independent.


I love the sound of what's described in the article.

Nope, sure wouldn't. We don't have any geothermal sites nearby that would allow it's use. However, I would build something similar to Dennis Weaver's earthship. Maybe not the ship design though. Sod or underground houses would save you a bundle on energy use. Heck, even converting to a sod roof where ever your at would help tremendously, and also give us more plants to suck up all that nasty CO2 some people complain about. 2-4 inches of dirt on your roof, some grasses and broad root shrubs, away you go.
 
I WISH! The wife is too afraid of creepy crawlies coming in. (yeah I know but try and tell her!) Well that and the possibility of a dank or moldy smell if moisture builds up in the pipes.

Wimmens!!! :roll:

Yeah, they work best in arid climates.

And if you put in screens small enough to keep all the bugs out you cut the airflow.

Its still an awesome ancient tech.

I regularly amaze people with simple airflow solutions. Living with swamp coolers teaches you a lot about how to move air around a house. And things like closing up and shutting out the sun works better than opening all the windows. Of course everything I know is based on semi to arid climes. Humidity is a bitch!

We have an old Craftsman with the second story bedroom that has windows all around, which functions as a wind tower.
 
Back
Top Bottom