The world probably won’t end with a bang, but might just crumble beneath the accumulated consequences of our actions.

Meanwhile, American politicians’ opinions of science, especially climate science, are at an alarming low.  Sometimes TV makes me wonder if [...]]]>

First 2000, and now 2012: Years in which people think the world might possibly end.

The world probably won’t end with a bang, but might just crumble beneath the accumulated consequences of our actions.

Meanwhile, American politicians’ opinions of science, especially climate science, are at an alarming low.  Sometimes TV makes me wonder if there are people who think a 2012 apocalypse is more plausible than global warming.

Watching GOP candidates in debate is a bittersweet experience.  On one hand, the stupid things they occasionally blurt out invariably wind up on YouTube for my amusement.

You-becky-becky becky-becky-stan-stan, anyone?

On the other hand, these guys have a fair shot at becoming arguably the most powerful person in the world.   That’s where the bitter comes in.  They speak in a  sober, defiantly ignorant voice, with the seeming expectation that what they don’t know doesn’t matter.

Sometimes it does matter (a combination of egregious dumbness and sexual sketchiness shamed Cain off the stage) but what scares me is when it doesn’t.

Take Rick Santorum, for example.  Here’s a short excerpt and transcript from a Q&A session he did in New Hampshire last week.

Someone asked how he integrated recent findings of climate change into his policies.  He waved away the whole issue by using scientists, icebergs, and tail-wagging dogs in a meandering metaphor to demonstrate why climate science is not worth considering.

And when he was done talking, people clapped!  Kind of half-heartedly, but still! That stopped The only thing more frightening than ignorance is ignorance with power.

Basically, he argued that there are so many factors so we can’t know for sure what’s causing any changes.  Nevermind that just about anybody with a lick of sense agrees that we’re making a lot of CO2, which gets stuck in the atmosphere.

Nevermind that nobody knows the perfect method for, oh, say, oil mining, but they rough through it anyway because the result is valuable.  Not knowing something doesn’t mean that we should give up; it means we should devote more resources toward finding the answer.  Santorum using ambiguity as a reason to disregard the question only draws attention to how his party has utterly failed at giving climate science the support it needs.

Around Christmas, a short piece showed up in the New York Times about how climate science is stagnating, despite 2011 being one of the most extreme weather years on record.

In May of 2011, 100% of Texas was abnormally dry.  48% was officially in exceptional drought conditions–that’s even more extreme than “extreme drought.”

At the other extreme, New Jersey had an extreme winter: 50.7 inches (more than four feet) fell in my hometown of New Brunswick.  I’ve lived there for 15 years but can count the white Christmases we’ve had on one hand.

These are quick and dirty examples of extreme weather conditions with immediate effects at home.  Objective truths about global warming will emerge as trends in data analysis performed by climate scientists, and I’d like these truths to emerge before they show up as three feet of snow on my car every other week.

It’s true that there are hundreds of factors that contribute to climate change, but it’s stubbornly naive to claim as Santorum does that CO2, as a byproduct of industrial processes, is not the primary actor.  It’s true that climate science and efforts to change energy use in major industries can incur significant costs, but so can bad weather.  The final cost of this year’s weather extremes is still being tallied, but will likely surpass $50 million.  That’s in comparison to a typical year that costs the U.S. $3 or $4 billion.

Making sense of these changing weather patterns will require scientists to analyze large amounts of data, integrating trends over years and millions of square miles.  They need personnel, and concerted support from the Federal government, not half-assed pooh-poohing from a man who could well become President.

The GOP in general sets a bad example by blocking efforts to organize and increase funding for climate research initiatives.  Republicans overwhelmingly deny the general consensus on global warming,  disparaging it instead as a “propaganda attempt” by the Obama administration.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Department of Energy still finance climate research, but many scientists find that there’s not enough to go around.

This research also has valuable practical applications.  Our company, for example, depends on climate data to calculate things like insulation thickness, heating and cooling loads, and gutter sizes.  We’re a green contractor, so energy efficiency is more crucial to our calculations, but every building depends on this information being accurate.  The more efficient our homes, the more money clients save.

Global change affects everyone, not just Americans, so hopefully other governments will have more sense than Congress and fund this crucial research.   Passive houses, for example, have greater momentum in Europe than in the U.S., so more resources are available to passive builders and passive houses are cheaper to build.

And what does all this have to do with Eco Brooklyn, beyond normal climate calculations?  As green contractors, we obviously take the local environment of each home into consideration when designing a plan for energy efficiency.  Compare that with, say, a large non-green building company like Toll Brothers, who may build the same exact house in Texas as in Nebraska.

Now that the environment is hitting higher record temperatures and precipitation levels than ever, Eco Brooklyn is venturing into what we call “Survival Building.”

We’ve started taking examples from extreme climates and integrating them into New York’s brownstones, in order to prepare them against heat waves, snap freezes, and flash floods.  We take inspiration from the “Earthship” and “Passive House” movements, which focus on installing tight insulation and maximizing solar gain to reduce heating and cooling needs.  These homes remain naturally cool in the summer and warm in the winter.  We put up a blog post recently that explains these concepts in detail.

Our our buildings consider rainwater runoff seriously.  We build green roofs, dry wells, rain gardens, and other water harvesting systems to reduce flooding.

We use clay walls in our houses that work like adobe walls in Pueblo architecture.  If they can endure the New Mexico heat, they can handle New York heat waves, with the benefit of retaining heat in winter.  Our passive houses are sealed tight against energy loss, but the envelope also protects against extreme wind or rain.

Eco Brooklyn’s brownstones are green fortresses.

So even if we see the beginnings of a climate apocalypse in 2012, we’ll be ready, and if Santorum gets elected, at least we’ll be insulated against his hot air.

In response to a recent Environmental Building News feature story about the inefficiencies of building-integrated wind turbines comes this subtly hilarious examination of the efficiencies of building-integrated prayer wheels.

Now of course if you are a Tibetan [...]]]>

You’ve got the efficiencies of building mounted wind turbines and then you’ve got the efficiencies of karma.

In response to a recent Environmental Building News feature story about the inefficiencies of building-integrated wind turbines comes this subtly hilarious examination of the efficiencies of building-integrated prayer wheels.

Now of course if you are a Tibetan Buddhist, and there are many, increasing the efficiency of good karma through making prayer wheels more effective is a very serious matter. I’m all for anything that makes more good vibes.

A building integrated wind turbine is mounted on the roof and turns with wind. A building integrated prayer wheel is mounted at street level and is turned by people’s hands. With each turn of either wind turbine or prayer wheel you generate energy. Whether it is electricity or good karma, its all just energy.

Microwave Radiation – Cell phones, Wi-Fi Are they safe?

As fast as possible, our society is becoming more and more technologically oriented. Homes, schools, offices, entire communities are making decisions to go wireless. Cell phones are proliferating at an alarming rate. These devices were never pre-market [...]]]>

Here is something from Bau-Biologie that is interesting:

Microwave Radiation – Cell phones, Wi-Fi
Are they safe?

As fast as possible, our society is becoming more and more technologically oriented. Homes, schools, offices, entire communities are making decisions to go wireless. Cell phones are proliferating at an alarming rate. These devices were never pre-market tested for your safety. There is an incorrect assumption that the government has “approved” these and that the research shows these are safe.

What are the hazardous levels of microwave radiation? It all depends on with whom you speak. From the perspective of Building Biology, it is when the cell structure or bio-communication of an organism starts to exhibit variations from a natural baseline. For example, if blood cells start to clump together at specific electromagnetic field strength, then this would be characterized as a variation of normal cellular activity, a deviation from the natural baseline, and therefore hazardous. Whether or not a person would exhibit a symptomatic response is NOT the determining factor, but that is the basis for most industrial standards – radiation is safe unless the skin actually burns.

Independent, medical science continues to provide mounting evidence that radiation from wireless communication devices, including cell phones, cordless, and the WiFi now deployed across schools, hospitals and offices, produces dangerous health effects. It is important for you to take protective steps as a consumer. We are concerned with eliminating as much as possible, the man-made artificial stimuli that can bring about this change. Thus, we hope to prevent the chronic low-level exposures that are very significant concerning health issues.

What can I do about it?

There are, however, some initial steps you can take today to protect you from EMR exposure.

1. Minimize all exposure and usage of wireless communication: cell phones, cordless phones, and WiFi devices.
2. Turn cell phone off when not in use and definitely when sleeping. Never keep it near your head or use it to play games, movies, etc.
3. Keep cell phone at least 6-7 inches away from your body and others while on, talking, texting and downloading.
4. Never keep cell phone in pocket or on hip all day. The hip produces 80% of the body’s red blood cells and is especially vulnerable to EMR damage. The close proximity may also affect fertility.
5. Do not talk on cell or cordless phone when pregnant, with a baby/small child in arms, under age 16, or while in a vehicle (car, train, plane, subway) – the radiation gets trapped and is higher in these closed metal zones!
6. Replace all cordless and WiFi items with wired, corded lines (phones, Internet, games, appliances, devices, etc.). The cordless phone base emits high levels of EMR – even when no one is making a call. (900MHz Analog cordless phones are okay)
7. Minimize/space out computer use, sit back from the screen; flat screens are preferable. Use wired Internet connections, not WiFi – especially for laptops. Keep laptops off of the body and preferably on wooden surfaces.
8. Keep a low-EMR sleep, home, and personal zone. Move alarm clock radio at least 3 feet from head or use battery power; 6 feet is the recommended distance from all electronic devices during sleep.
9. Avoid waterbeds, electric and metal frames. Futons/wood frames are better than metal-coiled mattresses and box-springs. Metals attract EMR: keep them away from and off of the body.
10. Ensure that there are no electrical appliances, power meters, or circuit panels on the exterior or interior wall of bedrooms.

It has three interesting components. These apply to hot water only since we are really managing the amount of energy we added to the hot water. [...]]]>

Here is an image of the proposed plumbing setup for the green show house in Brooklyn. Chester Birchwood from New York Solar Systems is installing it.

It has three interesting components. These apply to hot water only since we are really managing the amount of energy we added to the hot water. The cold water doesn’t apply to the same needs as you may see below.

1. Hot water home runs.
This is when all hot water pipes in the house, usually 1/2″ thick, go directly from the boiler to the outlet with an individual line each. Or instead of each outlet you could do home runs to each floor in the house, where there is an individual line going from the boiler to each seperate floor. This is instead of the normal way of having a main hot water pipe, usually 3/4 inch, that is called a riser and has 1/2″ branches off of it going to each outlet.

The problem with the main riser option is that when you turn on the faucet it takes a long time for all the cold water in the larger 3/4″ inch pipe to flow down the drain until eventually the hot water arrives. The home run means there is a smaller 1/2″ pipe going directly to that one faucet. This means less water has to run down the drain until the hot water arrives. The difference between 3/4″ and 1/2″ is actually a lot of water so with the home run you wait less time for the hot and you also waste less water waiting.

2. Hot water return.
A hot water return setup is when there is a pipe that is connected to the hot water pipe near the outlet and it returns back to the boiler. In this configuration you have a pump on the line that is constantly circulating the hot water in a loop. This means there is instant hot water when you turn on the tap.

Normal builders use this set up for user convenience because it is luxurious to have instant hot water. But there is a green aspect since you aren’t wasting water down the drain waiting for the hot water to come. Green builders are using the hot water return to save water more than the convenience of having hot water 30 seconds sooner.

But there is energy wasted as the heat escapes out of the constantly hot pipe (even if it is insulated). The boiler has to keep reheating the water. And the pump also consumes electricity. Normal builders don’t care since this is normally done for high end buildings where money (or ecology) is not the main concern.

For green builders this wasted energy is an issue. It defeats the purpose of saving water. A few solutions are normally used to solve this. The first is to have a switch near the faucet that turns on the pump for 30 seconds. Instead of turning the faucet on and waiting 30 seconds you flick the switch, wait 30 second, THEN turn on the faucet for your “instant” hot water.

A variation on this is to have an automatic sensor near the faucet (usually motion sensor) that turns the pump on when you move in front of it. Thus you avoid having to remember to flick the switch. This later option is not great since studies have shown there are too many false alarms, i.e. somebody simply walking by the sensor.

Another option is to avoid the sensor or switch and put the pump on a timer, for example so that it turns on every morning for an hour and then again in the evening for an hour. This means during peak usage there will be hot water on demand (and thus no wasted water waiting for it). And when people rarely use the hot water (middle of the night for example) the pump is also sleeping and no energy is wasted.

A variation on that, and some say a better one, is to put a temperature sensor on the pump and use a variable speed pump. This means it will pump water until a certain temperature is reached and then it will slow down the water pumping to a slow trickle. One plumber who does this says that the electricity used to power the pump at that speed is almost nothing. “So little electricity you could put your tongue on it”, he says. And if the pipes are insulated you don’t need to worry too much about heat loss there. Perhaps, but I do.

This brings me to the system we are devising in our show house. We will have a combination of two methods: we will have a timer that turns the pump on only at peak periods. AND we will have a variable speed pump that slows to a trickle when the water reaches a certain temperature. And of course the pipes will be fanatically insulated.

3. Hot and cold water mixing
This one I don’t fully understand and thus am not fully sold on it yet. But Chester claims it is a good idea and he has done a good share of boiler installations. The set up is where the hot water return is mixed with the cold water from the mains right before entering the boiler. The idea is that the water entering the boiler is warmer than normal and thus the boiler uses less energy to heat it up. My confusion here is that I don’t see why you would want to cool the water that is circulating in the pipes of the hot water return. I still have to get my head around this one.

Originally the top facade of the building had a lot of rotted wood. And there was a great view. So in the heat of the summer I tore down the wall and planned on adding a wall of glass. It would have been magnificent.

But [...]]]>

Above: Facade with planter and recycled joists.

Originally the top facade of the building had a lot of rotted wood. And there was a great view. So in the heat of the summer I tore down the wall and planned on adding a wall of glass. It would have been magnificent.

But then as the cooler weather came I came to my senses and realized the large window was on the north side. To have it would be a huge heat drain on the house. I basically made a colossal mistake. This is green building 101.

So I took the windows I had already bought for the space and put them on the south side of the house. This creates a very powerful passive heating element as the sun pours into the house and heats it. Solar gain to the max.

Then I was faced with doing something with the gaping hole on the north side. Some of the old slate had been broken when we took down the wall so we had a problem. We didn’t have enough slate to built it back nor could we buy similar stuff. Do we take down the rest of the remaining slate and replace it or what? Taking it down is so not green.

So I decided to get a little artsy and use the slate we have for the lower part of the facade. For the upper part we are going to create siding out of salvaged wood joists. We are going to shape it in a “V” shape and at the base of the V we will put a large planter that will collect the water from the siding above it.

The planter will be made of two triangular sides attached to the facade to create a harmony of triangular shapes with the larger triangle formed by the siding.

Even though the planter box will be very well insulated and one of its three sides will be against a heated house we will use plants that don’t need sun or warmth since the cold winds can be harsh up there. Water probably won’t be an issue since we’ll use water retaining materials in the earth.

The planter will help insulate the north wall, provide greenery, allow us to recycle old joists and keep the existing slate. This is a great example of green building.

Pre Construction:
The truly green thing would have been to repair the damaged wood and leave the windows as they are in this picture. But in the heat of renovation we got these grand ideas to make a wall of glass. Being in an environment you love is green to but not at the expense of wasted energy when you can have just as nice windows but on the south side….

And so we tore the facade off:

But then we realized our mistake and tore the south wall down to put the already ordered windows there. The sun shines in wonderfully making a fantastic space and heating us up. In the summer this heat can be a problem so we plan on having good passive ventilation, blinds, and solar panels above the windows that will also act as awnings when the sun’s angle is high in the sky during the summer months. During the winter months the sun’s angle will be low enough to pass under the panels.
The south opening:

They build homes that require basically no heating or cooling at all, regardless of where the house it. How do they do it?

They use a series of air and water tubes and ducts to pass heat and cold around. They have tubes [...]]]>

One technology I have my eyes on is developed by Isomax.

They build homes that require basically no heating or cooling at all, regardless of where the house it. How do they do it?

They use a series of air and water tubes and ducts to pass heat and cold around. They have tubes in the roof and walls that pass either into the earth outside the house or into the earth beneath the house. The area outside the house cools the tubes and the area beneath the house heats the house. The same happens with the air ducts.

The area beneath the house becomes a heat storage area as hot water from the roof and walls during the summer passes under the house and leaves the heat. Then during the winter that very same heat is still there but only now it is taken out of the earth and put back into the house.

The house takes two or three years to really get going because you need one or two summers to get the ground under the house warmed up but after that you can expect a house that stays the same constant temperature throughout the whole year.

It is a very interesting technology.

Insane amounts of insulation, triple pane windows, fanatic air sealing, smart solar [...]]]>

A “new” construction style coming out of Germany creates houses that barely need energy to run. They don’t even have heating systems. In the dead of winter they might need a little space heater but that is is. What is the secret?

Insane amounts of insulation, triple pane windows, fanatic air sealing, smart solar design, good air circulation and efficient appliances.

Here is a list from their site:

Compact form and good insulation:
All components of the exterior shell of the house are insulated to achieve a U-factor that does not exceed 0.15 W/(m²K) (0.026 Btu/h/ft²/°F).

Southern orientation and shade considerations:
Passive use of solar energy is a significant factor in passive house design.

Energy-efficient window glazing and frames:
Windows (glazing and frames, combined) should have U-factors not exceeding 0.80 W/(m²K) (0.14 Btu/h/ft²/°F), with solar heat-gain coefficients around 50%.

Building envelope air-tightness:
Air leakage through unsealed joints must be less than 0.6 times the house volume per hour.

Passive preheating of fresh air:
Fresh air may be brought into the house through underground ducts that exchange heat with the soil. This preheats fresh air to a temperature above 5°C (41°F), even on cold winter days.

Highly efficient heat recovery from exhaust air using an air-to-air heat exchanger:
Most of the perceptible heat in the exhaust air is transferred to the incoming fresh air (heat recovery rate over 80%).

Hot water supply using regenerative energy sources:
Solar collectors or heat pumps provide energy for hot water.

Energy-saving household appliances:
Low energy refrigerators, stoves, freezers, lamps, washers, dryers, etc. are indispensable in a passive house.