Posted October 24th 2010 by J. Angelo Racoma under Green Technology

110-Year Old House Gets an Upgrade & Now Produces Its Own Electricity!

Kelly & Matt’s 110-year old house in Ann Arbor, Michigan is America’s oldest net zero energy house and Michigan’s first of such kind. The house actually produces more energy than it consumes after being retrofitted and renovated. The roof was fitted with solar cells. The walls were fitted with improved insulation. The windows were all changed with insulated glass. The plumbing was converted to low pressure plumbing that requires less water than conventional systems. All this adds up to a net zero energy requirement.

The house usually consumes 10,000 kWh per year, but the solar panel produces 12,500 kWh for a net 2.5 megawatts extra power. This is enough to power an electric car for about 10,000 miles per year.

The total investment cost? $47,130. This yields a return of $104,000 in about 20 years, inclusive of tax credits and feed-in-tariff credits from the electric utility. Not bad for a 110 year old house.

By EarthTechling at EarthTechling Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:15pm EDT

by Susan DeFreitas

What’s the most ecologically conscious way to heat and cool your home? While a number of green alternatives exist, geothermal technology is one that’s been gaining ground in recent years. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), geothermal heat pump installations have seen strong growth over the past 6 years, and, as of 2008, totaled over 1 million nationwide. Approximately 100,000 to 120,000 systems are installed annually in the U.S. in about 1 out of every 38 new U.S. homes.

Geothermal typical System

While the popularity of geothermal heating and cooling may be new, the technology itself has been around since the late 1940′s. Geothermal heat pumps work by exploiting a natural fact: no matter how large the atmospheric temperature fluctuations in different regions of the world, the temperature just a few feet below the earth’s surface remains a steady 45 degrees F (7 Celsius) to 75 degrees F (21 Celsius).

How It Works

The parts of a geothermal heat and cooling system include a heat pump, an air delivery system (i.e., ductwork), and a heat exchanger. The heat exchanger is, essentially, a system of pipes buried in shallow ground. In the winter, when above-ground temperatures drop, the heat pump removes heat from the below-ground air inside the heat exchanger and pumps it into the building via the indoor air delivery system. In the summer, the process is reversed, and the heat pump pulls air from inside the building into the heat exchanger, where heat is removed, thanks to cooler temperatures below-ground. As an added bonus, heat removed from the indoor air during the summer can also be used to provide a free source of hot water.

Different Types of Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems

Geothermal systems come in four types, each of which are appropriate for different circumstances, based on the climate, soil conditions, available land, and local installation costs. All four approaches are equally appropriate for residential and commercial applications.

The Horizontal type system is generally most cost-effective for residential installations, especially new construction, provided enough land is available. In this system, two pipes are used-one buried at 6 feet and the other at 4 feet, or two pipes placed side-by-side at 5 feet in the ground in a 2-foot-wide trench.

(continued below)

The Vertical system, as the name suggests, requires less in the way of acreage and more in terms of trench depth, and is often more appropriate for large commercial buildings. The Vertical system uses two pipes buried 20 feet apart and 100-400 feet deep, connected at the bottom with a U-bend to form a loop. These “vertical loops” are connected with horizontal pipe (i.e., manifold), placed in trenches-often under commercial parking lots-and connected to the heat pump in the building.

A third type, called a Pond or Lake system, makes use of an existing body of water and a water-source heat pump. In this system, a pipe is run underground from the building to the water and coiled into circles at least 8 feet under the surface, in order to prevent freezing.

The final type of system, the Open Loop system, uses well or surface body water as the heat exchange fluid. This water circulates directly through the heat pump system, absorbing the temperature below the earth, then returns to the ground through the well, a recharge well, or surface discharge. (This option is practical only where there is an adequate supply of relatively clean water and all local codes and regulations regarding groundwater discharge can be met.)

While there are no areas where geothermal heat pumps won’t work at all, there are places where efficiencies and installation costs make them impractical-for instance, areas with very dry soils, or where the climate is relatively mild and varying, such as coastal California. In the latter type of settings, an air source heat pump (which operates the same way as a ground source heat pump, but without taking air from below the ground) will do just as well.

More information on selecting and sizing a geothermal heating and cooling system is available from the DOE.

If you’re currently in the market for a new geothermal heat pump system, the federal government will kick in a 30 percent federal tax credit as part of a credit that also applies to solar technology. A wide variety of state and local incentives are also available, so it pays to do some research before you calculate costs.

The Future of Geothermal Heating and Cooling

What will it take for geothermal heating and cooling to gain more widespread acceptance? According to Chris Kielich, spokesperson for the DOE, it’s an issue that rests largely in the costs of adoption and individual contractors’ willingness to learn a new technology.

“Any new building technology that is not a simple replacement has a long uptake due to the decentralized nature of the construction industry,” she told EarthTecling. “Each individual builder has to be willing and able to install the new technology.” Studies on the future of geothermal heating and cooling are available from Navigant (PDF) and ORNL (PDF) for those who are curious.

By MATTHEW L. WALD October 19, 2010, 8:29 am

A “direct wafer” from 1366 Technologies, left, made by casting it in its final form, and a traditional one, made by sawing slices off a block. The direct one costs 80 percent less, the company says.

A company that secured a Department of Energy grant to pursue a breakthrough idea in the manufacture of solar cells plans to announce on Tuesday that it has raised $20 million to commercialize its technique, which it says will reduce the price of solar panels by 40 percent.

The company, 1366 Technologies of Lexington, Mass., has found a simpler way to produce the basic building block of solar cells: silicon wafers. It uses molten silicon to cast the wafers in their final form, six inches on one side and 200 microns thick, or about eight-thousandths of an inch.

The current method is to cast the silicon in huge ingots or grow it in giant crystals and then saw off thin pieces, which wastes about half of the silicon.

“Early indications show this could be one of our great success stories,” said David Danielson, the program director for solar energy at the Advanced Research Projects Agency — Energy, a new office within the Energy Department that provides relatively small grants to develop high-risk but potentially high-payoff technologies. It promised 1366 a grant of $4 million for an 18-month program to develop the wafer technology; 1366 is reporting success after eight months.

The company is expected to announce that it has raised $20 million in new capital, some of it from a major customer for the wafers, Hanwha Chemical of South Korea. Other investors include Ventizz Capital Fund, a European company that specializes in clean energy investments. Two companies that had previously invested, North Bridge Venture Partners and Polaris Venture Partners, have also added funds.

The chairman of Hanwha, Ki-joon Hong, said in a statement that his company had “every confidence that 1366’s innovations will fundamentally change solar manufacturing.”

The silicon, the basic material of solar cells and computer chips, is derived from a very cheap material, sand. But to function in electronics it must be made extremely pure, which makes it expensive.

The new technique, going from molten silicon to final product, is a bit like frying pancakes as opposed to slicing salami, except, as Mr. Danielson put it, “when you cut a salami, it’s not like half the salami ends up as salami dust that you have to throw in the garbage.”

The trick is to get the wafer out of the mold without breaking it. Company officials will not say just how they do that. The president of 1366 Technologies, Frank van Mierlo, predicted that the development would make solar power cheaper than coal power, although the technique has not yet been commercialized.

If the wafers go to market, 1366 would be one of the early fruits of the ARPA-e program, which was authorized by Congress in 1997 and signed into law by President Bush but was not financed until the passage of the federal stimulus act, which gave the program $400 million over two years. In December, 1366 received $4 million.

The company’s name is a reference to the amount of solar energy, measured in watts, that falls on a square meter of the earth’s surface.

The cell has other refinements, including finer wires to conduct away the electrons, so the shadow cast on the energy-gathering area is smaller. And the company drills small holes into the cast wafer to give it a honeycomb appearance, which allows light to bounce around inside the crevices, producing better absorption and less reduction, Mr. van Mierlo said.

The Realist Idealist turned her home into a lab for energy-efficient, money-saving ideas for sustainable living. Here she uses a rain barrel. (Don Kelsen / Los Angeles Times, Don Kelsen / Los Angeles Times / January 9, 2010

It started with gray water, then escalated to chickens, composting toilets and rain barrels. I’m talking about the two years I’ve spent transforming my humble California bungalow into a test case for sustainable living — an experience that’s cost me hundreds of hours of my time and thousands of dollars, an endeavor that has tested the limits of not only my checkbook but also my sanity — and my DIY skills.

When I launched the Realist Idealist column, the idea was to look at environmentally promising home improvement projects through the eyes of a budget-minded consumer. I had seen so much media coverage that heaped praise on newly constructed eco-manses or expensive retrofit products, but the stories didn’t answer my biggest question: For the green-minded person writing the checks, are the improvements worth the time, effort and expense?

Although everything I retrofitted seemed wise at the time I did it, hindsight tells a different story. Over time, I occasionally questioned the wisdom of some actions.

The idealist in me finds value in every improvement, but the realist can’t deny that some have been far better in terms of payback — if not financially, at least morally. The systems that easily fold in to my busy life are the ones I’ve enjoyed most.

What’s been worth the money and effort, and what hasn’t? I’ve divided the projects into two categories: “Worth It” and “Second Thoughts.”

WORTH IT

Gray water, 1st place

Gray water is the waste generated from faucets, showers and laundry machines — water that accounts for 54.2% of all water used inside a home, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. With California deep into a drought, in August 2008 I retrofitted the plumbing on my laundry machine to send its gray water onto my landscape. Over the last two years, that simple switch has sent 9,720 gallons to passion fruit vines instead of the sewer, and it required only one change to my usual routine. I had to swap laundry detergents because my usual brand, like many, contained salt and other ingredients that kill plants.

When I first installed a gray-water system, it wasn’t legal. Making it legal would have required a permit, extensive filtering apparatus and lots of cash. But in August 2009, these laundry-to-landscape systems were legalized in California, as long as homeowners followed 12 guidelines.

I’ve been so pleased with this low-cost, high-impact system that I hired a plumber to expand it in January, tying the wastewater from my bathtub, shower and bathroom sink into the same gravity-fed plumbing line that handles my laundry water. This so-called simple system also was legalized in California in 2009. Its legal status has since been rescinded, so once again I’ve gone rogue. I estimate my additional savings to be roughly 1,120 gallons per month.

Financially, this system is paying for itself, just slowly. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power charges me less than half a penny per gallon, so technically, gray water has saved me only $95 in water costs so far. But it’s also reduced my sewer charge by about one-third, saving me an extra $3.30 per month. In drought-prone Southern California, gray water feels like the right thing to do. It’s been the easiest, most sensible, hassle-free, sustainable system I’ve put in place at my house.

Cost: $1,988 ($312 for the laundry-to-landscape plumbing, $1,676 for bathtub and bathroom sink tie-in)

Resources: Greywater Action, http://www.greywateraction.org; Oasis Design, oasisdesign.net

Solar power, 2nd place

Photovoltaic systems pay off most quickly for consumers who use a lot of energy because tiered rates impose a penalty for heavy use, but solar electric still makes sense for low-energy users such as myself.

So much of Americans’ carbon footprint results from buildings — about 43%, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. I’m a household of 1.5 (mom and 7-year-old), and we use only about 4 kilowatt hours of electricity per day, something we’ve managed through behavioral changes, such as turning off the lights in rooms after we’ve exited, and through in-home efficiencies, such as swapping out incandescent light bulbs for compact fluorescents and using power strips that can turn off DVD players, coffee makers and other energy vampires.

Using less electricity means I can get by with a smaller, less expensive photovoltaic system that not only covers my use but also produces a credit on my power bill. Going solar also meant my house was upgraded with a time-of-use meter. This type of meter allows me to receive credit for the electricity I generate during peak hours when electricity costs the most, but pay the least for the electricity during off-peak hours, when I recharge my cellphone and laptop and perform other tasks requiring power.

The downsides are that I am tied in to the grid and still susceptible to power outages, and I now have panels that need to be cleaned. It’s a subject of debate, but my installer, REC Solar, said dirty panels decrease energy production by 6% to 8%. Many panel manufacturers recommend cleaning panels at least once during the summer. I wash mine whenever they look dirty or dotted with bird droppings, which is about every other week.

I think $6,000 is a small price to pay, not only for panels that should generate my next 20 years of electricity, but also for the greenhouse-gases I’m not creating.

Cost: $5,939 ($11,564, minus a $3,898 DWP rebate and a $1,727 federal tax credit)

Resources: California Public Utilities Commission, http://www.cpuc.ca.gov; 1 Block Off the Grid, http://www.1bog.org; REC Solar, http://www.recsolar.com

Rain barrels, 3rd place

I was a rain barrel skeptic before I joined L.A.’s rainwater harvesting pilot program last fall and received a 55-gallon pickle barrel. Though rainwater holds such enormous potential for supplementing Southern California’s dwindling reserves of imported water, rain barrels seem like such thimbles. During a normal L.A. winter, my 1,500-square-foot roof generates 13,500 gallons of water — a tidal wave compared to what a little barrel can handle.

Having lived with rain barrels for a year, I’ve learned that their small size makes them manageable and affordable. The water they catch isn’t stored only for summer use. It can be drained in between rains to water nearby plants. An added perk: reducing storm-water runoff to the ocean.

I have three rain barrels — one from the city and two that I purchased separately. They’re along the edge of my house, at the halfway point in a row of kiwi vines and berries. The 175 gallons they hold were a lot more useful than I’d expected for feeding my exceptionally thirsty fruit plants. The water they held lasted about a month into the summer.

I never had mosquitoes. I did, however, have some algae growing in the plastic tubes connecting my rain barrels, but it wasn’t significant enough to reduce flow. Water pressure was problematic only for the last few gallons of each barrel.

I still think larger rain catchment systems are preferable. Alas, larger systems frequently need electric pumps and are far more expensive. In this economy, affordability rules. And it’s affordability that could lead to mainstream adoption and significant water savings for our parched city.

Cost: $500 ($300 for rain barrels, $200 for installation and parts)

Resources: L.A. Rainwater Harvesting, http://www.larainwaterharvesting.org; Rain Bud, http://www.rainbud.com

Earth works, 4th place

Rainwater isn’t only a resource. It’s also a potential pollutant if it runs off property onto pavement, picking up fertilizers and automotive fluids that are washed, unfiltered, into the ocean.

To prevent my home’s contributions to runoff, which could be as much as 10,000 gallons per year, according to L.A.’s Bureau of Sanitation, I’ve sculpted my landscape to retain as much rainwater as possible.

The parkway between the sidewalk and the curb is concave and mulched. My backyard is home to a 15-foot-wide hole in the ground that is fed with gutters from my roof. During the rainy season, this infiltration pit can hold as many as 500 gallons at a time, allowing it to gradually replenish groundwater. During the dry season, it’s been doing double duty as a skateboard pit.

Cost: Not easy to determine because it was part of a larger landscape project, but for DIYers, potentially free

Resources: Rainwater harvesting books by Brad Lancaster, http://www.harvestingrainwater.com

::

SECOND THOUGHTS

Waterwall

The Waterwall is an Australian product that is exactly what its name implies: It’s a wall that catches and stores water. Water channeled from the roof and gutter drains into a tank shaped like a thick concrete-block wall. It operates similarly to a rain barrel but holds six times as much water and is better looking. It’s also modular, allowing water to flow freely from one wall into another in series.

The Waterwall was expensive, and installation was a nightmare. It’s an excellent idea that simply wasn’t worth the money for a person of my means. If California’s drought persists and water prices start going through the roof, I’m likely to change my attitude. But so far, the $4,078 I’ve spent to store 634 gallons of water I could have bought from the city for about $3 is an embarrassment, particularly with so many ways to conserve.

Even worse, it’s been annoying to use. I put my Waterwall near a trio of stone-fruit trees that would happily drink in the water. Unfortunately, the water pressure drops along with the level of water in the wall, and running the water through a relatively short, 15-foot length of hose or even lifting the hose above the spigot decreases its flow rate.

I love the Waterwall in theory, and I still think I would’ve ringed my backyard with Waterwalls if I’d known about them 10 years ago, when I installed an appallingly expensive redwood fence.

Cost: $4,078 ($2,300 for two walls, plus $944 for shipping and taxes, plus $834 for installation)

If I had to do it over again: I’d go with a cistern or a large, agricultural above-ground tank.

Edible landscaping

When the economy was freefalling two years ago, I couldn’t shake the fear that the American infrastructure was about to crumble and that I should start growing my own food. Thus began an incredibly long, expensive and back-breaking journey. Not only did I have soil that was high in lead, but I also had critters that liked to dig and destroy. Then there’s the water issue. It takes a lot of the wet stuff to grow most fruit and vegetables.

Having transitioned my low-water ornamental landscape to edibles, I’d say this is a project for people with time, money and a love of gardening and cooking. It isn’t a job for single mothers with high-stress jobs who’d rather not spend their precious down time watering, pulling weeds and bringing in their harvest.

I’ve resigned myself to the fact that I won’t likely learn as much as I should to maximize my yields. At this point, I’m just hoping this whole project won’t end up being a high-cost intellectual exercise that bears little fruit. Passion fruit and tomatoes have had the biggest payoff so far. Beans, corn and kale? Not so much. It’s so easy to get high-quality produce from a CSA, or community supported agriculture group, which is what I’ve been doing for the last year: spending $18 a week for organic, locally grown produce conveniently delivered to my son’s school.

Cost: outrageous

If I had to do it over again: I would install one or two planter boxes. I’d buy the rest of my produce from a community-supported agriculture group such as Equitable Roots.

Composting toilet

Water is a precious resource, and we flush an awful lot if it away. At my house, my low-flow toilet uses 1.6 gallons per flush. If it’s flushed 10 times a day, that’s 16 gallons of imported drinking water that’s pooh-poohed and sent 23 miles to a wastewater treatment plant that uses precious electricity to process it, then has to dispose of leftovers.

The final frontier of green living, the composting toilet is a low-tech option. There are a surprising number of commercial composting toilets on the market that look nice, cost a fortune and can’t handle heavy use, which is why I went with something called a Separett. Developed in Sweden, it’s a piece of plastic foam that looks like a toilet seat except it’s outfitted with two holes — yes, No. 1 and No. 2. Each empties into its own 5-gallon bucket I access through a trap door on the side of my house.

I’ll admit, as committed as I am to living green, this is not a system I use all the time. In fact, I use it rarely, and only for No. 1

As much as I support the premise of a composting toilet, I’m more devoted to the traditional porcelain god. I just try to flush less.

Cost: $627 ($127 for Separett, $500 for construction labor and materials to convert built-in cabinet to toilet)

If I had to do it over again: I might need more clearance under my house, but I’d go with a commercial composting toilet from Clivus Multrum.

Chickens

This is one of the projects I was most excited about and one that’s turned out to be among my biggest failures. After buying a chicken coop, feed and hens procured through L.A. Animal Services, I got only four eggs.

L.A. may be a sprawling metropolis, but it isn’t devoid of wild animals. Some people have coyotes. I’ve got possums and raccoons, which breached my coop and gobbled down my ladies.

A forensic investigation revealed the intruder had dug under its edges, so I fixed the problem by driving stakes deep into the ground and nailing pieces of wood to other possible areas of entry. Although I wasn’t 100% confident that these beady-eyed villains wouldn’t return to the scene of the crime, I nevertheless journeyed back to the animal shelter to purchase two more chicks, only to be woken up at 1 in the morning to the sound of distress. Running outside, I found a lady bird dangling from the mouth of a shiny-eyed raccoon. The other chicken was missing.

I’ve been buying eggs at the store ever since, but I was hipped to my local egg underground. Last week, I got my first dozen eggs from a neighbor who’s more game than I for the challenge of raising chickens.

Cost: $530 for coop, feed and chickens

If I had to do it over again: I would skip the coop and find a local alternative.

::

SIDEBAR: EASIER FIXES

Green home improvement doesn’t have to mean elaborate new systems or expensive construction projects. Some small steps for a greener life:

Laundry line: Clothes dryers account for 5% to 10% of a home’s energy use. I have one, but I use it only if I’m desperate. My laundry line is strung unobtrusively across my backyard deck, and the sun dries clothes in mere hours. For me, the low-tech laundry line is about the easiest and simplest thing I can do to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Cost: about $50 for equipment.

Diet: My home improvement retrofits have convinced me that more environmental savings could be obtained by eating less meat and dairy. The cattle business creates more greenhouse gases than the transportation industry, according to a 2006 United Nations report. So, although I love burgers and can’t give them up entirely, I eat fewer, and I’m mostly substituting almond and soy milk for dairy.

Composting: About 26% of the U.S. municipal solid waste stream is yard and food waste, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Composting that waste is how I produce only a small grocery bag’s worth of trash every other week. It’s one of my greatest achievements. About a quarter of my trash savings comes from composting food scraps. Cost: $20 for a bin through a city of Los Angeles composting workshop.

Recycling: The other three-quarters of my trash savings comes from recycling, for which I have an almost-religious fervor. About 80% of what Americans throw away is recyclable, yet only 28% actually is recycled. Cost: nothing but the time it takes to throw something in the blue bin.

Panasonic's Home Energy Management System (HEMS)

Osaka, Oct 15, 2010 (ACN Newswire via COMTEX) — Panasonic Corporation announced its Home Energy Management System (HEMS) has received the European Utility Award 2010 in the Customer Excellence category at the 12th Annual metering, Billing/CRM Europe conference and exhibition in Vienna, a leading and innovative utility trade show in Europe. Panasonic became the first Japanese company to win this recognition.

The Customer Excellence Award honors an innovative service in the field of energy in Europe that brings high levels of customer satisfaction and a change in customer behavior. Panasonic was recognized for its pioneering initiative to spread customer-oriented, user-friendly and fully-featured home energy management solutions to homes in Europe through its partnership with SEAS-NVE, Denmark’s largest consumer-owned energy company.

“What really separates the Panasonic offering from others is the way in which it relates to the customer in an intuitive, non-technical, fun, aesthetic and customizable manner, moving beyond the industry’s standard of graphs and numbers. The Panasonic approach brings functionality, practicality and appeal together,” the award citation says.

Towards a low carbon society, Europe has seen increased activity in field testing and commercialization in the HEMS related areas such as smart meters and smart grids. With HEMS at the core, Panasonic continues to promote its comprehensive environment and energy solution business through participation in pilot projects organized by utility companies in Europe.

– Metering, Billing/CRM Europe

The Metering, Billing/CRM Europe conference and exhibition is held annually in Europe. Approximately 150 companies including meter makers, IT vendors and utility service providers took part in the exhibition held from September 22 to 24 in Vienna, Austria this year. Major European utility companies reported on their pilot schemes at the conference. The trade show is used as a forum to explore and learn the trends of the energy market as well as business meeting. For more information, visit http://www.metering-europe.com/

– European Utility Awards

Metering, Billing/CRM Europe gives the European Utility Awards every year in three categories: Business Performance for improved profitability, cost reduction and value creation in the European energy market; Customer Excellence for distinguished services to achieve higher levels of customer satisfaction and bring a change in customer behavior; and Innovation for innovative projects such as energy measurement and customer management. This year, Germany’s Elster received the Business Performance Award and Italy’s ENEL won the Innovation Award.

About Panasonic

Panasonic Corporation is a worldwide leader in the development and manufacture of electronic products for a wide range of consumer, business, and industrial needs. Based in Osaka, Japan, the company recorded consolidated net sales of 7.42 trillion yen for the year ended March 31, 2010. The company’s shares are listed on the Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya and New York /quotes/comstock/13*!pc/quotes/nls/pc (PC 14.61, -0.23, -1.55%) stock exchanges. For more information on the company and the Panasonic brand, visit the company’s website at http://panasonic.net.

Source: Panasonic

Contact:

Overseas Public Relations Office
Panasonic Corporation
Tel: +81-3-6403-3040
Fax: +81-3-3436-6766

THE TAX PICTURE

A recent tax credit lets homeowners looking for a more energy-efficient way to heat and cool their house get a new geothermal heating and cooling system. A onetime tax credit of 30 percent of the total investment is offered to homeowners who install residential ground loop or ground water geothermal heat pumps.

Geothermal typical System

The System

A geothermal home comfort system taps into the abundant source of free solar heat energy stored in the earth and uses a series of pipes (an earth loop) buried in the ground to move that heat into a home during cold weather.

The Tax Break

Through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, homeowners who install a geothermal system before Dec. 31, 2016, can take advantage of the federal renewable energy tax credit for the system. Homeowners may also get utility rebates and other tax incentives.

Other Advantages

Even without the tax break, the long-term return on installing such a system can make it worthwhile. The energy source is free and renewable and the average system lasts over 24 years-compared to 15 years for an ordinary system. In fact, the Environmental Protection Agency considers them to be one of the most efficient heating and cooling systems available.

According to the experts at WaterFurnace, most geothermal systems are easy to install in both new and older homes. Once installed, the system requires less maintenance than a conventional heating and cooling system and operates more efficiently, delivering an astounding four units of energy for every one unit of electrical energy used. That translates to a 400 percent efficiency rating and savings up to 70 percent for heating, cooling and hot water costs.

Another plus: A geothermal system uses no fossil fuel and emits no carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide or other greenhouse gases. Homeowners experience added comfort, improved indoor air quality and less noise as they reduce their carbon footprint.

(continued below)

There are no signs that homeowners are growing complacent about environmental concerns and there is still a lot of interest in green DIY improvements.

This is the view of Matt Hunt, a spokesman for renewable energy firm BritishEco, who said the prospect of saving money is always a popular reason to improve energy efficiency in the home.

His comments come after a report from the Energy Saving Trust found that 61 per cent of consumers are more interested in taking steps to save energy than they were a year ago.

Seven out of ten respondents said they hate the idea that they are wasting energy, while three-quarters said they were actively looking for ways to reduce their gas and electricity bills.

Mr Hunt said his company, which designs and installs a range of micro renewable energy solutions, including solar panels, is busy at the moment, suggesting that the need for greener homes has not diminished.

“There is still a desire from people to make their houses environmentally sound, especially if they are rewarded with fixed tariffs and things,” he remarked.

DIY Home Energy Audits

Auditing a home’s energy use while going solar can be a smart move – it can give a homeowner a picture of his house’s energy consumption and help him see where solar power will contribute to energy savings.

Combining a solar installation with an energy audit is nothing new. SolarCity – one of the nation’s largest solar leasing companies – bought an energy-audit software company, Building Solutions, in May. The purchase lets SolarCity provide energy-auditing services at the same time it installs solar arrays for residential customers.

Energy audits and solar projects are naturally interlinked: Both lead to energy savings, and both can save homeowners money. It’s the cost savings that make a home energy audit a good investment, whether the audit is performed before or after a homeowner installs a solar array.

Even the White House may benefit from an energy audit. The Obama administration announced recently that it would install solar panels on the building – and a green-education company called CleanEdison offered to audit its energy use at no charge.

Average homeowners should expect to pay for their home energy audits, but the cost isn’t substantial – usually $400 to $500.

(continued below)

Internal Sponsorship:
Just released from GreenEcoClub the DIY Easy-Energy-Audits. This step-by-step guide will show you how to do energy audit on your home like the pros. Easy-Energy-audits

Finding a professional energy auditor can be a good idea: Professionals have equipment that can help them perform a comprehensive audit, like giant fans that blow air through a home so that pinhole leaks can be detected. They also use infrared cameras to find sources of heat loss.

Homeowners can undertake some simple energy-auditing measures themselves, too. To find air leaks on a shoestring, a person can simply light a candle and draw it slowly around window and door frames. If the flame flickers, there’s air entering the home – so the leaky spot should be sealed up with felt strips or plugged with a commercial-grade leak-filling product like Great Stuff.

There are also products that help people see how much energy their appliances are using. Any comprehensive home energy audit should include an examination of appliance energy consumption – and devices like the Kill-a-Watt can make the process easy. The Kill-a-Watt, which has a small display, simply plugs into the wall. After appliances or electronics are plugged in, the display registers how much energy is being consumed.

Going cutting-edge on energy efficiency means cutting some serious checks, Milton case shows

By Johanna Seltz
Globe Correspondent
October 10, 2010

MILTON — Andrew Koh is learning that going extremely green — his house renovation project is designed to cut home energy costs in half — can cost a lot of green.

Take the new water heater he’s installing as part of the “deep energy retrofit’’ of 225 Gun Hill St., the 30-year-old Garrison-style home he and his wife, Tracy, bought last year.

“It’s the prettiest water heater I’ve ever seen,’’ Koh said.

And it’s 96 percent efficient, compared with the 80 percent efficient water heater he had not so long ago in their old condominium in South Boston. That translates to using nearly a fifth less energy, he said.

But the old heater cost about $500 and the new super-efficient one sells for “well north of $2,000,’’ Koh said.

“The biggest moral of this story, for us, is that going green will cost you more than conventional,’’ he said. “And as you go further and further to the extreme, things get exponentially more expensive.’’

He’ll save money, of course, in reduced utility costs.

But unlike other families who take a more conservative approach to going green — and get an immediate payback — Koh figures it could take many years before the savings catch up with the eco-investment at his house. Luckily it’s not all his own money on the line.

“Obviously, we wouldn’t do all of this if there weren’t some funding dollars behind it,’’ he said.

The biggest financial support comes from National Grid, which is sponsoring the project as part of the utility’s “Deep Energy Retrofit Pilot Program.’’ Manufacturers and retailers also have donated or deeply discounted such things as solar panels, foam insulation, and appliances.

But the fact that the true cost of the project is beyond most homeowners’ budgets doesn’t lessen the worth of the exercise, Koh said. His house, he said, is a laboratory of sorts — an experiment in the best ways to make an old house energy-efficient.

(continued below)

“The deep energy retrofitters are the warriors,’’ said Caitriona Cooke of the Conservation Services Group, a Westborough-based company that advises on energy efficiency. “They’re setting an example and leading the way, showing what’s possible.’’

“The ultimate goal is the trickle-down effect,’’ Koh said. “Not everybody will go to the extremes we have, but there are a lot of practical lessons to be learned from what we are doing.’’

They’re lessons likely to be heeded in Milton, he said. The town recently adopted the new Stretch Energy Code mandating energy efficiency, so it can apply to be named a green community by the state. The designation would make Milton eligible for state grants for energy-efficient projects.

Energy efficiency wasn’t high on their priority list when Koh, who runs a software security company, and his wife, a physical therapist and personal trainer, started looking for a new home. The green they sought was a yard where their two young sons could play.