Friday, January 26, 2007
Green houses, the return on photovoltaics in New Jersey, and John Edwards' palazzo
We need a new house and have some particular requirements which are rare in existing homes, so we are thinking seriously about building from scratch. We are discussing the project with a local builder who has suggested that we put a photovoltaic system into the roof that can meet most if not all of the home's electricity requirements. Apparently, generous state subsidies for the initial investment and New Jersey's high electricity rates (which, by the way, will only go higher as the result of this decision on behalf of fish in the Delaware river) make it possible for the system to pay for itself in as little as four years. If true, that seems like a no-brainer to me: how often can you earn 25% on your money and slash carbon emissions to boot? Indeed, even if it takes 8 years to pay for itself the return is still very attractive. It makes me wonder why everybody doesn't put in a photovoltaic system (this builder, by the way, wonders the same thing -- he is now installing conduits to support the required wiring into every house he builds so that future owners can easily retrofit PV systems). Since the heating and cooling of homes accounts for approximately 20% of America's energy use, it seems we could make a big dent in our energy consumption by promoting the installation of PV systems into homes, especially expensive new homes.
All of this has led me to read unTigerHawk-ish articles such as "The Green House Effect" (sub. req.) in today's Wall Street Journal. It discusses the boom in green home construction, some of which is obviously more about politics than sensible home economics:
It's still not easy to go green. In 2005, architect Phil Bernstein set out to expand his family's 2,500-square-foot home in New Haven, Conn., by another 1,500 square feet. Mr. Bernstein and his wife wanted to use green design -- like double-pane windows and expanding-foam insulation -- as much as possible, but ran into problems. They had a hard time finding kitchen countertops made of recycled material, for one. "We found some in Seattle, but we decided it would defeat the purpose to have a truck spewing carbon emissions bringing them all the way here," Mr. Bernstein says.
The couple also wanted to use an alternative to mahogany for their cabinets that didn't come from endangered forests. They found one called Lyptus -- a hybrid of two species of eucalyptus trees -- but when the cabinets arrived, they were pink. Mr. Bernstein worked with his builder for three months to find the right dye for the wood.
The project is now months behind schedule, and has cost $500,000 so far -- $300,000 over budget, in part because of the complications in going green. That's far more than Mr. Bernstein, who is also a vice president at software maker Autodesk Inc., would expect to recoup on a home he values at about $800,000. "If we sold this house, we would lose our shirts," he says. "It's like one homeowner against the world."
I'm not that green. And, by the way, neither is Mr. Bernstein. Hard core conservation still requires living small:
"The biggest thing people could do to be green is not to build a 4,000-square-foot house, but a 2,000-square-foot house," says Tim Hermach, executive director of the Native Forest Council, an environmental group in Eugene, Ore.
All of which got me to wondering, did Democratic presidential "timber" John Edwards use green technologies to build his 28,200 square foot palazzo in the Carolina woods [link fixed]?
UPDATE (January 27): No doubt stung by Drudge's mocking link to the story about his house, John Edwards has rolled out his wife to write about the awesome greenyness of his 28,000 square foot house. I've highlighted my favorite parts in bold, and my annotations are in italics.
Here is what our family has done and is doing.
We sold the conventional fuel SUV that we used to carry children, strollers, luggage and toys between Washington, DC and North Carolina, and we bought a hybrid, a Ford Escape. [I know that I'm delighted that the Edwards family has such a good reason for driving an SUV.]
Since we were building a home in Orange County, we decided to take advantage of some of the technology that President Carter had encouraged.
All the water (all of which comes from wells) in our home and some of the flooring is heated with solar energy.
We built a highly energy efficient house. In fact, our home is Energy-Star rated. Energy Star is an EPA regulated designation for homes that are at least 30 percent more efficient than the national Model Energy Code. In building we made sure we had effective insulation in floors, walls, and attics. We chose efficient heating and cooling equipment and high-performance windows. Our builder paid close attention to making sure the construction was tight to seal out drafts and moisture. The day the independent inspector came to evaluate the house, we were on pins and needles while he tested our home's energy performance. As he packed his equipment, he gave us the good news: we are an Energy-Star home!
We recycle, of course, although just yesterday we got our Orange County recycle bin. [In a bit of arrestingly good luck, Mrs. Edwards was able to get the recycle bin only one day after Drudge mocked her family for building a 28,000 square foot house.] Until then we used the recycle facility just down the road. (The trash compactor I debated putting in is really useful for compacting cans and plastic, it turns out.)
And as the incandescent light bulbs the electrician installed in our fixtures burn out, we are replacing them with fluorescent bulbs. [Bizarrely, Mrs. Edwards missed a primo opportunity to congratulate Wal-Mart on its campaign to push fluorescent bulbs into every house in America.] If you are thinking that we are living now in harsh light, with buzzing sounds and constant flickers, you are thinking of your grandmother's fluorescent bulbs. There are a wide range of shapes and fittings available now; there are even dimmable fluorescents, and honestly I cannot tell without checking which of our bulbs are still incandescent and which are now - and will continue to be -- fluorescent. Switching is a little bit of a bite, because the bulbs are more expensive (although Costco and eBay have some good prices [What? It is Wal-Mart that's making a big deal out of these bulbs. Are we, perhaps, unwilling to annoy anti-Wal-Mart activists on the Democratic left?]), but replacing a single 60 watt incandescent with a 15 watt fluorescent you use just six hours a day could see an energy savings of more than $40 over the 4 year (4 year!) life of the bulb. And it is not just energy. A single fluorescent bulb "can prevent more than 450 pounds of emissions from a power plant over its lifetime" according to the Energy-Star website. That same site has these incredible statistics: "If every American home replaced just one light bulb with an ENERGY STAR, we would save enough energy to light more than 2.5 million homes for a year and prevent greenhouse gases equivalent to the emissions of nearly 800,000 cars." One bulb.
No mention of photovoltaics, though.
19 Comments:
By 
GreenmanTim, at
Sat Jan 27, 12:01:00 AM:
Your builder is right. For new home construction, photovoltaics are the way to go. The subsidies you mention can be exceedingly generous, the technology is lightyears ahead of where it was just a decade or two ago, and it will work even in places that have lousy, cloudy weather. Like New England. Or New Jersey.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Jan 27, 09:57:00 AM:
The Edwards estate looks like a good place to house poor people after the next disaster like Hurricane Katrina.
By 
, at
Sat Jan 27, 10:18:00 AM:
The article says Edwards has two stages in his new house. One for each personality?
Wealthy people, like architect Bernstein cited above, can afford this stuff. For ordinary middle-class people, even with state subsidies, it's still a lot of extra money up front when you buy a home. How many people with median incomes can go $300,000 "over budget" for a green home?
By TigerHawk, at
Sat Jan 27, 11:28:00 AM:
Mystery Meat, don't get me wrong -- I think a lot of the "green" technologies, such as straw insulation, are probably silly. The economics of photovoltaics are compelling, though. In New Jersey, you can put a system in that will power your whole house for $15,000. Thereafter, you will pay no electric bills and you can generate a few bucks a month selling power back to the grid. I think you earn north of 20%, and if you do it when you build so you can finance it with your mortage loan you do better than you are likely to do with most financial investments. Either I'm getting some bad advice or people are just not doing their due diligence before they buy new construction. The question is, why?
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Jan 27, 11:33:00 AM:
What maintenance costs and efforts go with this stuff? Is there a certain little piece crucial enough that if it goes out (water drips on it, whatever) that the whole system shuts off? Do they have to be cleaned regularly?
Just make sure you get all the facts, and not just the selling points.
By , at
Sat Jan 27, 12:32:00 PM:
ummmm......you perhaps were expecting better from Edwards......? Reality check time. That home was purchased with wrongful death lawsuit fee money, i.e., we all paid for it.
By Mark in Texas, at
Sat Jan 27, 03:42:00 PM:
The really big expense that I have seen in a lot of photovoltaic systems is that people are trying to go "off the net" so they spend as much or more on a battery back up system as they did on the photovoltaic array. If you stay hooked up to the electric system, the photovoltaics might be cost effective even if they don't take care of all of your electricity needs all of the time.
The largest consumer of electricity is air conditioning. The peak demand for that is when the sun is shining. That is when your photovoltaics will be producing maximum electricity. The electric utilities have to build enough capital equipment to handle the peak demand. By shaving peak demand with your own rooftop generator, you are allowing your local utility to forgo the cost of building that much additional peak capacity which they have to pay for and maintain all year long.
Of course, THE most cost effective thing that you can do to save energy is to put more insulation in your attic. Go down to Builder's Square today and buy a roll of the pink stuff and lay it out in your attic. Every bit helps.
By Pudentilla, at
Sat Jan 27, 04:54:00 PM:
up here in central maine lots of folks use pv for their camps which are so remote that they aspire to be so centrally located as to worthy of the designation "off-grid."
i think for most urban dwellers the problem historically has been the combination of two factors a) you couldn't tie your system into the grid; and b) the battery technology is still not great.
if you have to be totally off grid in a camp in the maine woods, you need solar and batteries and you take the state of technology. but if you're in a suburb why would you do it? once you get to tie into the grid or better battery technology it makes excellent economic sense. local electric companies have only in the last several years been promoting the grid tie ins for solar - so it's not surprising that folks from away are starting to want it.
as for the edwards jibe, why do republicans hate it so, so much when a man works hard and succeeds? would you complain about a palazzo paid for with unearned, but inherited wealth?
By Pudentilla, at
Sat Jan 27, 09:46:00 PM:
Not, perhaps, the most accurate representation of his practice. But hey, don't let the facts get you down.
By TigerHawk, at
Sat Jan 27, 10:20:00 PM:
Not the least accurate either, Pudentilla. Half the med-mal cases were over cerebral palsy claims.
By Hell_Is_Like_Newark, at
Sat Jan 27, 10:37:00 PM:
please note: NJ has suspended processing applications for Solar PV rebates. There was a potential scandal brewing with charges of corruption in distributing the $100 million slush fund used to fund the rebates.
The program is coming back though. The administration of the program is being farmed out to the private sector. Honeywell Inc. is the company, from what I was told, that will be processing all Solar PV rebate applications.
By Purple Avenger, at
Sat Jan 27, 11:13:00 PM:
Do they have to be cleaned regularly?
Yes. PV efficiency declines dramatically in the presence of crud/dirt.
Within a few years LED lighting will be the rage. The CFL's are just an interim solution.
By , at
Sun Jan 28, 12:03:00 AM:
"you can put a system in that will power your whole house for $15,000"
I've looked into this quite a bit lately, but the math doesn't add up for me. I'm having a hard time accepting that you think this is going to pay off in 4 years or even 8 years.
I am curious about a few things:
What is you current monthly electric bill is?
What kWh are you currently burning in your house?
Do you have a southern exposure?
I find it hard to believe that for that price the cells can produce enough power for your house.
My experience is this:
My current electric bill averags around $130/month. I needed 20 grand worth of cells for my 1600 sq ft home.
It will take me about 13 years to pay it off if I can get the projected kWh. But there will definitly be times when I can't produce enough electricity... so I still need to stay connected to the grid. I'm not even adding that cost into the calculation.
Also these things have a 20 year warranty and over time they don't collect as much energy.
Don't get me wrong... there's alot to learn about this and I may be missing some details, but my work so far says you will be lucky if it pays for itself in 15 years. Especially in New Jersey.
By , at
Sun Jan 28, 12:15:00 AM:
Hmm... don't mean to sound too critical. There is a certain value to being green.
I am still looking into this purchase... my big motivation is black outs.
I'm contemplating getting a backup system that is about 3 grand... I could go fairly cheap and just get a gas powered generator but that's still probably going to cost over $500 to get it setup properly.
There is the gridpoint system which downloads electricity for you home at optimal (least expensive) times of the day. Mostly at night.
This system costs about 10 grand. Ironically, I calculate that it will take about 15 years to pay off also.
By Papa Ray, at
Sun Jan 28, 01:42:00 AM:
Lets don't go "green" lets go survialist and cheaper.
First, the poster who suggested extra insulation is right. But be sure and not block off your attic vents. You want air moving thru your attic, otherwise your asking for big problems and 200+ degrees in your attic if you live where the sun shines.
Second, buy the most efficent windows you can buy, tinted if you don't mind and the same with any sliding doors. Built awnings over the windows on the sun lit sides or some type of shade. Trees work great. Also, if you have too many windows, block them, build over them, make bookshelves where they were. Windows are the ports where you exchange heat and cold, remember that.
Third, buy a hot water on demand water heater. They are the only way to go, and their prices have went down over the last few years.
Fourth,Buy a generator, but don't buy some $ 3000.00 unit. Buy one meant to power your house, or at least most of it. Make sure it is multi-fuel, such as any type gas and propane or LP. Have it wired in where that it senses power loss and kicks in and also will disconnect when power is restored. Unless your an electrician, let someone else install all of this.
Fifth, install all fluorescent lighting, it's available in almost every configuration for homes that you can ever need.
Sixth, if your heating/cooling unit is over ten years old, replace it even if it still works great. The new units run cheaper and work better.
If you have a fireplace, make sure the damper is closed at all times it is not being used. A cast iron stove heats better, but kits can be bought to increase the heat from a standard fireplace. Better yet, don't have one.
Keep your clothes dryer clean and spotless, with as short of a venting system as is possible to the outside. Make sure it has an all weather hood on the outside exaust. Don't run your dryer unless it has a full load. More energy costs are associated with dryers and hot water heaters than most people think possible.
Better yet, put up a clothes line in your back yard.
Gas is cheaper for heating water, and gas clothes dryers are a little more expensive but the cost of running them is much less.
Build a small house, less to heat, cool and clean.
Turn everything down or off and spend more time at your friends and family's houses. This alone will lower your bills dramaticly.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
By TigerHawk, at
Sun Jan 28, 08:42:00 AM:
For a conservative, Papa Ray, you sure know a lot about, er, conservation. :) Anyway, those are all good ideas. We are going to do most of them, except the small house party. Ours won't be huge, but it will be north of 5,000 square feet when all is said and done.
Sometimes people forget that the first conservationists were conservatives. The reason they forget is that too many conservatives today champion sheer wastefulness in the name of economic growth.
Atlantin, I don't think that you have to be a solar power ideologue to think that photovoltaics make sense. I have cousins who live near hear, retrofitted their old farmhouse with a 9 megawatt system, and are very happy with it.
Hell_is_like_Newark, thanks for the tip on the applications. I'll look into it. I'm guessing that it will be summer before we need to move forward.
Anonymous at 12:03:25:
I appreciate all your comments on the economics. My goal is not necessarily to avoid paying any electric bill, but to shrink the electric bill. Whatever we're consuming (and I'm sure we could consume less with better household habits), a solar system will defray a big chunk of it and that will generate some return on investment. In New Jersey, we have very high electricity costs -- they are 10th in the nation right now, and only going higher for regulatory reasons. Since I wrote this post I have had dinner with my cousins in Hopewell who put in a retrofitted system at some point in the last few years. They still pay a small electric bill, but he says that he has calculated his return on investment at 22% (which is just about what my builder independently predicted). Even if the state subsidy went away, the return would still be north of 10%, which is still better than you can reliably get with financial investments (or unleveraged real estate, for that matter).
By Hell_Is_Like_Newark, at
Sun Jan 28, 11:51:00 AM:
A little more on Solar: Disclosure: I perform energy audits, energy efficiency improvements, and I am also a sales rep for a solar company in the NJ / NYC - metro area.
Solar ONLY makes sense if it is heavily subsidized. I have no illusions about gaining any sort of 'energy independence' via solar. The energy required to refine silicon and make a solar cell is intense. This is one reason they are so damn expensive.
NY gives you lots of rebates up front, plus access to un-secured loans with rates as low as 2% (5 year loan is about 4%). Max loan amount is $20k
NJ gives you less up front, but much more on the back end. The subsidies are lower and you don't have access to the low rate loans (I am working with a bank to offer something via the private sector). However, NJ has a big market for trading REC's (energy credits). Utilities are mandated to buy a certain amount of power from renewable resources. Ever MW the panels produce creates an energy credit. Those credits are selling for $150 to $230 per MW. A typical small residential system will produce 3 to 4 MW per year.
PV panels will pay themselves off in 10 - 13 years, but are warrantied for 25 years. They will probably last longer than that (the rectifier is warrantied for 5 years). If you take into effect the lifecycle costs (capital investment vs. total return over a 27 year period), you will get your money back and then some: Either from the power generated from the panels or from the increased resale value (you have a home that has 60% lower utility bills than normal).
Beyond PV panels the BEST way to reduce your utility bills is to upgrade the insulation in your home. MOst homes (including new homes) are not well insulated. Fiberglass is TERRIBLE for insulating homes because it doesn't stop air infiltration.
If you have $350+ a month heating bills during the winter, get an energy audit done before you do anything else. A few thousand $$$ worth of insulating and airsealing may go farther than putting in any energy star rated boiler or putting in a big investment in generating your own power.
By TigerHawk, at
Sun Jan 28, 12:44:00 PM:
Hell:
I would great if you would send me an email so that we could correspond or talk off line (if you were willing). My address is on the top of the right sidebar.
By Papa Ray, at
Thu Feb 01, 08:14:00 PM:
TH, I hope you see this, I meant to post it earlier but been really busy.
R-values per appx. 1" thickness
Material
R-value
per 1"
Fiberglass batt & blanket 3.27
Rock wool batt & blanket 3.2 to 3.7
Fiberglass loose fill (blown) 2.2 to 4.0
Rock wool loose fill (blown) 2.9 to 3.6
Cellulose loose fill (blown) 3.2 to 3.8
Vermiculite loose fill (poured) 2.27
Perlite loose fill (poured) 2.7
Sprayed polyurethane foam 6. to 7.3
Fiberboard sheathing 1.32
Expanded polystyrene (extruded) 5.
Expanded polystyrene (molded)
3.85 to 4.35
Polyisocyanurate board (unfaced) 5.8 to 6.2
Polyisocyanurate board (faced) 7.1 to 8.7
From http://www.hometips.com/cs-protected/guides/insulation.html
As you can see the sprayed polyurethane and the polyisocyanurate board is the way to go. Expensive but much better in all respects, especially good also for keeping bugs and mice out.
Also, if you have a choice, face the house where the most openings are facing north, unless most of your wind and storms come from that direction. Even then if your doors and windows are up to par, facing your house north is best.
I have a bud that has a house that is built into the side of a hill and the roof is about three foot of dirt with grass. His house faces south, so that he can get evening sun and he has thermal shades that can be drawn in the summer.
He can heat and cool it for almost nothing. and the protection it affords for other purposes is self evident.
Even if you do go solar, the investment in a good generator can't be overstated.
Times are a changing and everything has to be planned for.
Also, depending on the laws in your state, underground fuel storage is best. But do store fuel in some manner in a protected area of your property.
Remember the six P's,
Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
Papa Ray
