Take the ENERGY STAR new homes program, for example, the one I’m most familiar with. Version 1 required only one inspection, a home energy rating (for the performance path), and no checklists. Version 3, which becomes mandatory for builders wanting the ENERGY STAR label on their homes starting next January, requires 2 inspections, a home energy rating, and 4 checklists.

I understand the need for it from the perspective of the program administrators. Building and energy codes are catching up with voluntary program requirements, so they have to keep moving forward. Program leaders also have attempted to clarify the ambiguity of early versions of program requirements. And they have to make sure that the program is meaningful and that when the program label appears on a home, that home is significantly better than homes without the label. I get all that.

It just seems like we’ve lost our way, that we’ve all gotten blinded by a confusion of checklists, worksheets, prescriptive measures, and certification levels. Not to mention the confusion that comes from having so many different programs out there. If you’re a builder, you have to decide if you’re going for ENERGY STAR, LEED for Homes, EarthCraft House, NAHB Green Building Standard, Environments for Living… It’s not an easy task.

One of the first points of confusion that participants in the ENERGY STAR program face is whether to certify via the prescriptive or the performance path. That sounds pretty clear-cut, right? When you take a closer look, however, you find that the prescriptive path has performance requirements (e.g., testing for duct leakage and infiltration rates), and the performance path is chock full of prescriptive requirements. Just look at the 4 checklists required in ENERGY STAR Version 3.

As constructed, the performance path is differentiated from the prescriptive path by its requirement for a HERS rating. It’s based on how the home is constructed, how it tests out, and how the software does the energy modeling. It doesn’t depend on how the house actually performs, though, and that could differ significantly from the modeled performance. One reason we do it this way is so that the homes certified will carry the program label while they’re for sale, thus helping the builder to market their homes.

But what if we included the performance of a home over its first year of occupancy? Then we could include the actual energy use and calculate the energy intensity, even separating out baseload from the energy used for heating and cooling. It seems to me that this would be one of the best ways to handle quality assurance, too. If HERS raters, builders, and trade contractors know that their work has to pass not only the initial inspections but also a full year’s worth of performance assessments, don’t you think they’ll pay a bit more attention to getting the details right?

We could simplify the requirements for the initial certification and make sure everyone knows that the initial label means only that the home has gone through a process. Even though the energy modeling may say the home will use only $900 of energy per year, for example, everyone will know that that will be compared to the actual energy consumption for the ‘real’ label.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on this Monday morning. I’m interested to hear what you think.

Top photo by acearchie from flickr.com, used under a Creative Commons license. Lower photo by Ian Sane from flickr.com, used under a Creative Commons license.

Two leading conservation organizations have set out to bring the efforts together. The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy and the Alliance for Water Efficiency this week published a white paper that describes the co-dependence of water and energy resources, and outlines strategies to use both more efficiently.

The paper brings to light some interesting – and rarely discussed – ways each resource heightens use of the other.

• Sourcing, moving, treating, heating, collecting, re-treating, and dispos­ing of water consumes19 percent of California’s electricity, 30 percent of its natural gas, and 88 billion gallons of diesel fuel annually, according to a 2005 California Energy Commission report.
• The River Network in 2009 found that energy use for water services accounts for 13 percent of US electricity consumption, at least 520 million megawatt-hours annually.
• Thermoelectric power accounted for an estimated 49 percent of US water withdrawals and 53 percent of fresh surface-water withdrawals in 2005.

ACEEE and AWE hope to work together on local, state and federal policy to bring more energy efficiency to water use and water efficiency to energy use. They have some hurdles to overcome. For example, “the water and energy efficiency communities do not share a common language or appreciation of existing efficiency efforts,” the white paper said. “In addition, the two communities frequently operate under different regulatory business models and existing structures that do not recognize the benefits of both energy and water savings.”

The organizations intend to develop approaches that encourage com­munication and guide the industries and their regulators. They hope to share best practices and integrate water efficiency into existing energy efficiency programs and vice versa.

1. How Blue Are You? PRICE: Free

This app from American Standard was released in April and is part of their larger campaign to raise awareness of water usage. It helps you calculate your water usage, the cost, and compares it to national averages. It also recommends more efficient products and offers quizzes, prizes and rebates.

2. Waterprint PRICE: Free

Waterprint helps you calculate an estimate of your personal “water footprint.” The idea is to break down your water use by food, beverages, products, and overall household, then calculate your usage. The app will also compare the water footprints of different items.

3. Water Buddy 1.0 PRICE: $1.99

This app was released in late March and is focused on making it easy for you to become aware of how much water you use.  You set a usage target for a period of time and then you keep track of your water meter readings. Don’t have a clue what kind of target you would set? They’ll help. And that’s a pretty good reason to try it out in the first place. Save water and money.

4. myUse PRICE: $1.99

This app, just released in April, tracks water, electricity and gas usage. It estimates your upcoming usage, so that you can walk by the meters and make simple adjustments, rather than taking more time to transcribe the data and transfer it to a spreadsheet. It also creates charts and graphs for a variety of measurements, allowing you to compare your usage to averages and keep track over time. Readings, charts and graphs are all exportable to email.

5. Toobz PRICE: Free

This one is for fun, but carries a lesson. The challenge is to arrange a system of “toobz,” or pipes, to allow the water to flow safely through the network you’ve built. As the levels advance, you have less time to build. Spill any water and you lose. Hmmm… increasing pressure to build efficient piping networks to fulfill water needs? This may be a game, but it sounds awfully familiar.

source: www.greenlivingideas.com

When America was its infancy the growth of this city was largely fueled by the need to build a better hub and city of “greatness” for the future, one with a mix of financial services and small industry. The city grew and is truly symbiotic as a one of the greatest cities in the world.

But its time for a new act for this great city. While the banking crisis has taken its toll its still a vibrant but very expensive city. It has little room to build upon a working class and what does it mean to live and work in city in our new economy.

I agree with the premise that its time to look to the infrastructure. The need for better public transport, better services in outer areas and the need for affordable housing in and outside of the city. This is a prescription that is for any city.

Having lived in San Francisco that saw great growth but very strident and cautious growth that led to outrageous prices in real estate while income fell flat and now in Seattle with the ubiquitous townhouses lining every street, absurd housing prices and the still ever growing sprawl in response I have to agree that without real improvements to the infrastructure a city cannot function well.

San Francisco tried to be responsive with making grand laws to get health care, free wi-fi, higher minimum wages and varying other “green” bills to make living in the City possible for a diverse group it did nothing to stop the ever growing white wealthy class taking over the city. Seattle is struggling with its light rail and trolleys to nowhere while realizing the best they can do to draw industry is poaching an investment bank from Tacoma to move north to the empty Washington Mutual building. Irony not lost.

And this brings New York.. bridges, roads and subways built in the times of grandeur dilapidated and pushed to extremes. Borough’s (the burbs) of NY still seen as being undesirable as more and more families, the backbones of cities, moving there and still seen as almost pioneers to a city that is largely populated by the rich and the white and very poor that serve them.

There is a real need to build our infrastructure to serve ALL the population and what a great way to build those green jobs that the maligned Van Jones wished for all. There is nothing more needed than building better public transport, better improved outlying areas to reduce the need to commute and maintain a better diverse city that has housing that is both rich and green for all. Schools that serve all the populations and not just the poor while the rich attend private academies.

The idea that the infrastructure is something that the Government is solely responsible is not true. There is nothing stopping private industry in taking on these projects and building new business models to find new business. We argue incessantly about the Government running everything and yet we turn to them to repair the largest and most significant part of our communities. While private developers are left to build nothing but commercial and residential properties that right now are at their highest glut.

Is it not time to see and demonstrate how we can prove the role of the private sector in making our cities and communities great again? And then in turn free up that financial obligation which will allow the Government to give us health care in return?

Source: GreenGoddess

Making a Difference with Green Community Strategies – Environmental sustainability and climate change issues are consuming the nation’s attention. As of February 2008, nearly 800 mayors have pledged to “meet or beat” the Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gas emission reduction target for the United States. Local leaders of cities and regions are adopting a wide array of green community strategies: “green” municipal operations and construction standards, alternative forms of transportation, and “energy smart” growth. Hear about these and other innovative implementation strategies.

They’re efficient but not necessarily economical
Reprinted from Consumer Reports October 2008 (published version includes a cost chart showing payback period)

Heating water accounts for up to 30 percent of the average home’s energy budget. Some makers of gas-fired tankless water heaters claim their products can cut your energy costs up to half over regular storage heaters. So is it time to switch? Probably not.

Gas tankless water heaters, which use high-powered burners to quickly heat water as it runs through a heat exchanger, were 22 percent more energy efficient on average than the gas-fired storage-tank models in our tests. That translates into a savings of about $70 to $80 per year, based on 2008 national energy costs. But because they cost much more than storage water heaters, it can take up to 22 years to break even — longer than the 20-year life of many models. Moreover, our online poll of 1,200 readers revealed wide variations in installation costs, energy savings, and satisfaction. With the help of an outside lab, we pitted Takagi and Noritz gas-fired tankless water heaters against three storage water heaters. We didn’t test electric tankless heaters because many can’t deliver hot water fast enough to replace a conventional water heater if ground-water is cold. Even in areas with warm groundwater, most homeowners would need to upgrade their electrical service to power a whole-house tankless model.

Our tests simulated daily use of 76 to 78 gallons of hot water. That’s the equivalent of taking three showers, washing one laun-dry load, running the dishwasher once (six cycles), and turning on the faucet nine times, for a total of 19 draws. While that’s considered heavy use compared with the standard Department of Energy test, we think it more accurately represents an average family’s habits. We also ran more than 45,000 gallons of very hard water through a tanked model and a Rinnai tankless model to simulate about 11 years of regular use.

Here’s what else we found:
Water runs hot and cold. Manufacturers of tankless water heaters are fond of touting their products’ ability to provide an endless amount of hot water. But inconsistent water temperatures were a common complaint among our poll respondents. When you turn on the faucet, tankless models feed in some cold water to gauge how big a temperature rise is needed. If there’s cool water lingering in your pipes, you’ll receive a momentary “cold-water sandwich” between the old and new hot water. And a tankless water heater’s burner might not ignite when you try to get just a trickle of
hot water for, say, shaving.

Nor do tankless water heaters deliver hot water instantaneously. It takes time to heat the water to the target temperature, and just like storage water heaters, any cold water in the pipes needs to be pushed out. And tankless models’ electric controls mean you’ll also lose hot water during a power outage. Up-front costs are high. The tankless water heaters we tested cost $800 to $1,150, compared with $300 to $480 for the regular storage-tank types. Tankless models need electrical outlets for their fan and electronics, upgraded gas pipes, and a new ventilation system. That can bring average installation costs to $1,200, compared with $300 for storage-tank models.

Tankless units might need more care.

During our long-term testing, an indicator on the tankless model warned of scale buildup. We paid $334 for special valves and a plumber to flush out the water heater with vinegar. Many industry pros recommend that tankless models be serviced once a year by a qualified technician. Calcium buildup can decrease efficiency, restrict water flow, and damage tankless models. Experts suggest installing a water softener if your water hardness is above 11 grains per gallon. Ignoring this advice can shorten your warranty.

Efficient storage models are pricey.

We also tested the $1,400 Vertex, a high-efficiency storage water heater by A.O. Smith. The manufacturer claims its installation costs are similar to a regular storage model. But its high cost offsets much of the roughly $70 per year the Vertex will save you.  Instead, we recommend buying a conventional storage water heater with a 9- or 12-year warranty. In previous tests, we found that those models generally had thicker insulation, bigger burners or larger heating elements, and better corrosion-fighting metal rods called anodes.

How to choose

Tankless models probably aren’t for you if higher up-front costs and long payback are a concern. But  they do use less energy and might make sense for long but infrequent use, such as back-to-back showers. Keep these points in mind:

Factor in location.

Unlike a regular water heater, a tankless model’s water output is immediately  affected by groundwater temperatures. The same model that produces 7.2 gallons per minute (GPM)  when installed in a warm Florida garage will output only 4.2 GPM in a cold New England basement  because the colder water requires the temperature to be raised 77 degrees rather than 44. Use your coldest groundwater temperature to calculate the gallons per minute you’ll need.

Know your flow.

Undersizing a tank-less water heater is a common mistake. Use our online  calculator, at How to size a water heater, to help you calculate your hot-water use for both tanked and tankless water heaters.

Get the details right.

Look for an oxygen-depletion sensor that shuts off the water heater if carbon  monoxide is detected and a film wrap around the heat exchanger that will shut off the device if it  gets too hot. Since tankless models are still relatively uncommon, consider using manufacturer trained  installers. Some companies extend the warranty if you do.

Look for rebates or incentives.

Many tankless models qualify for utility rebates and state tax  credits. Check the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency at www.dsireusa.org.

How they work…

Tankless models don’t store hot water. When hot water is needed, water flows through the device and the flow sensor
fires the burner. Water lines around the heat exchanger warm the water to the desired temperature. When the hot-water valve is closed, the flow sensor turns off the burner. (The flow must be fast enough, typically a half-gallon per minute, to turn on the sensor.) Capacity is expressed in gallons per minute.

1. Exhaust
2. Heat exchanger
3. Burner
4. Fan
5. Control Panel
6. Flow sensor
7. Hot water to faucet
8. Gas supply
9. Cold water supply
10. Cold water to faucet

1. Stop Those Leaks!
Check your indoor water using appliances and devices for leaks. Check out Leak Detection and Repair. Many silent leaks allow water and your money to go down the drain. To help detect unseen leaks go to Read Your Meter. Studies have shown homes can waste more than 10% due leaking, which costs both you and the environment. Another large water waster can be leaks in your irrigation system. Fix irrigation system leaks quickly and check for water in the gutters or mud puddles. Inspect your sprinklers and drip sprayers regularly for leaks during the daytime since the optimal time to water is in the nighttime hours when you cannot observe leaks. If you have an older irrigation system, over 50% and even more than 75% of the water can be lost to leaks. Learn more about irrigation systems…

2. Replace your old Toilet, the largest water user inside your home.
If your home was built before 1992 and the toilet has never been replaced, then it is very likely that you do not have a water efficient 1.6 gallon per flush toilet. You can check the date stamp inside the toilet by lifting the lid and looking at the back of the toilet at the manufacturer’s imprint of the make, model and date of manufacture. Learn more about toilets…

3. Replace your Clothes Washer, the second largest water user in your home.
Energy Star™ rated washers that also have a Water Factor at or lower than 9.5, use 35-50% less water and 50% less energy per load. This saves you money on both your water and energy bills. There is a current qualifying products listing of water efficient clothes washer models maintained by the Consortium for Energy Efficiency. Learn more about clothes washers…

4. Plant the Right Plants with Proper Landscape Design & Irrigation
Whether you are putting in a new landscape or slowly changing the current landscaping at your home, select plants that are appropriate for your local climate conditions. Having yard with 100% lawn turf area in a dry desert climate uses significant amounts of water. Also consider the trend towards Xeriscape™ and a more natural landscape or wildscape. Learn more about landscaping…

5. Water Only What Your Plants Need
Most water is wasted in your garden by watering when you plants do not need the water or by not maintaining the irrigation system. Be attentive if you are manual watering by setting your oven timer or some other reminder to move the water promptly. Make sure your irrigation controller has a rain shutoff device and that it’s appropriately scheduled. Most water is wasted in months prior to or just after the rainy season when intermittent rains occur. You can also consider installing a weather adjusting ET irrigation controller (see description in glossary) that automatically saves water by not watering when the plants don’t need the water, check with your local water provider to inquire if ET controllers work in your area. Learn more about using the features that you have in your garage for efficient watering like your hose and irrigation controller timer… Be sure to call your local water provider for more information and potential incentives. On this web site are many book and web site resources available to help research choices for water saving home appliances and landscaping choices.

Source: H2ouse.org

As a home owner insulating your home’s  hot water pipes is one of the easest and most cost effective measures you can do. The cost of pipe insulation is about $0.30to $0.40 per foot. Savings will depend on heating fuel (see below), but in all cases the payback is well within one year.

Annual Savings (Oil Heat @ $1.10/gallon): $0.58 per foot

Annual Savings (Natural Gas @ $0.75/therm): $0.56 per foot

Annual Savings (Electricity $0.10/kWh: $1.20 per foot

(source: All About Insulation, Massachusetts Audubon Society, 1986, p 18)

Tube pipe insulation may be used on domestic cold and hot water pipes. Pipe insulation will help to reduce heat loss by up to 80 percent through hot water pipes and will stop sweating on cold water pipes. Pipe insulation can also help reduce plumbing noise. It is pre-slit for easy installation (simply snapping onto the pipe), and may be trimmed with a utility knife. One package includes four 36 inch long pieces. Two sizes are available. The 3/4 inch ID (inside diameter) tube is suitable for use on 3/4″ copper tubing, 1/2″ PVC pipe, and 1/2″ steel pipe. The 1/2 inch ID tube is suitable for use on 1/2″ copper tubing, 3/8″ PVC pipe, and 3/8″ steel pipe.

For more information about saving water, energy and building sustainable homes contact Gary Smith. 1-877-809-6139

What is 2 to 1000 times greater inside than out, is impossible to see but at the same time has the potential to damage your eyes, can cause dizziness and nausea, and vaporizes at normal temperature and atmosphere? You guessed it…VOCs or volatile organic compounds.

Many of us spend more than 90% of our time indoors. Clean indoor air is as important as breathing. Some of the most critical factors influencing indoor air pollution concern our ability to eliminate or reduce specific sources such as tobacco smoke, radon, chemical irritants, and pesticides. It’s also as important that you control moisture, which can lead to mold growth and bacteria.

Ideally, it would be best to prevent these pollutants from being released in the first place, but that is not always possible or practical. An increased focus on proper ventilation can play a critical role in determining whether our indoor environment is healthy or not.

As a green building verifier my role is to help eliminate these conditions by teaching practical and proper building practices.

Listen to this National Public Radio program (Windows Media Player) conducted at Syracuse University on indoor air quality.

To learn more about VOCs and how to eliminate poor indoor air quality during construction contact Gary N Smith toll free at 877.809.6139 or visit him online at http://www.garynsmith.net.