-- Scotts Contracting - StLouis Renewable Energy

Search This Blog

11.15.2010

Electric, diesel or hybrid car? Cost and CO2 calculator helps consumers choose

Anyone Interested in Comparing today's green and eco friendly automobile choices try out the Electric Car Calculator at the below link, Easy to use with many driving scenarios, tailor to your needs, Co2 Reduction stats, Gasoline Prices, useful information to help you find the car that best fits your needs. Scotty

Electric, diesel or hybrid car? Cost and CO2 calculator helps consumers choose

Nov 15, 2010 Los Angeles Times
By Susan Carpenter
Nov. 15, 2010 (at http://www.befrugal.com/tools/electric-car-calculator/)(McClatchy-Tribune News Service delivered by Newstex) -- As the Environmental Protection Agency struggles with how to accurately label passenger vehicles for fuel economy and greenhouse-gas emissions, a new online cost and CO2 emissions calculator has launched to help fill the void."Electrics, hybrids, plug-ins, all these alternative powertrain cars are a hot topic these days, but there's not a good way to look at the bottom line of what it costs to own one of these," said Jon Lal, founder of BeFrugal.com, a frugal-living website that offers tools to help consumers save money, including its new calculator.
The calculator (at http://www.befrugal.com/tools/electric-car-calculator/) allows consumers to first determine which type of alternative-drivetrain vehicle best suits their driving needs based on what state they live in, how many city and highway miles they drive, how many road trips they take each year (and at what distance) and fuel costs in their state, whether it be electricity, gas or diesel.Using its database of 64 vehicles (four electric, eight diesel, 13 hybrid and 39 popular gas-powered cars) the calculator then allows users to make side-by-side comparisons using EPA miles-per-gallon data, manufacturers' suggested retail prices and other factors.Electric car operating costs are translated into an mpg equivalent, or MPGe, using individual states' electricity costs as calculated by the U.S. Department of Energy. Electric cars' upstream carbon dioxide emissions are also calculated using DOE data on the electricity source for each state.According to BeFrugal.com, Washington, Idaho, Kentucky, West Virginia and Arkansas are the states with the lowest electricity rates, making electric cars most economical on a cost-per-mile basis. Vermont, Idaho, Washington, Oregon and New Hampshire are the best states in terms of electric cars' lowest upstream CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour.The top two states for electric cars' lowest operating costs and greenhouse-gas emissions: Idaho and Washington.___

 



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
scottscontracting.wordpress.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

'Peak Oil' Behind Us?

Green: Is 'Peak Oil' Behind Us?

Nov 14, 2010 New York Times

JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF

International Energy Agency Projections of the world's liquid energy sources to 2035.

Peak oil is not just here — it's behind us already.

That's the conclusion of the International Energy Agency, the Paris-based organization that provides energy analysis to 28 industrialized nations. According to a projection in the agency's latest annual report, released last week, production of conventional crude oil — the black liquid stuff that rigs pump out of the ground — probably topped out for good in 2006, at about 70 million barrels per day. Production from currently producing oil fields will drop sharply in coming decades, the report suggests.

The agency does not see energy doom on the horizon, however. By its estimation, after a short dip in production, crude production will reach an "undulating plateau" of about 68 million barrels per day between 2020 and 2035.

Yet strong demand growth from China, which the report estimates is now the world's largest energy user, and elsewhere will require liquid energy supplies to not just hold steady, but to climb by more than 20 percent.

Meeting that additional demand will fall entirely on unconventional oil sources like Canada's tar sands as well as increased production of natural gas liquids. A major boost in these energy sources should be able to meet demand, but that is far from certain, Nobuo Tanaka, the agency's executive director, told reporters in London, according to the Associated Press.

"Recent events have cast a veil of uncertainty over our energy future," Mr. Tanaka said.

The I.E.A.'s stance that 2006 will be the year global supplies of conventional oil reached their ultimate peak is a more pessimistic take than its previous assessments. In 2008, the organization projected that conventional oil production would continue to slowly climb for several more decades.

Its current estimate that enough new oil will be found to keep the oil supply roughly steady for the next 25 years is hardly ironclad, however, a point the report acknowledges in the executive summary. "Will peak oil be a guest or the spectre at the feast?" its authors ask.

"The size of ultimately recoverable resources of both conventional and unconventional oil is a major source of uncertainty for the long-term outlook for world oil production," it concludes.

Over all, oil prices should continue to climb in coming decades, reaching $135 per barrel by 2035, a price level that some economists believe contributed to the global economic collapse of 2008.

Some experts found the report's projections troubling.

"It's a perfect storm headed our way — a steady rise in global demand for oil crashing up against an increasingly limited supply of economically recoverable oil," William Chameides, professor of environmental science at Duke University, wrote on his blog.



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Sec Chu stimulates renewable innovations

Energy Secretary Chu in sprint to put stimulus to work on renewable innovations

Nov 13, 2010 Washington Post

Steven Mufson

It's a stunning fall morning in Washington, and Energy Secretary Steven Chu, clad in bike shorts and a snug Stanford University biking shirt, climbs onto his Colnago bicycle and rolls down his leafy street and onto the Capital Crescent Trail. Then it's a 20-minute sprint - breaking the trail's speed limit - to downtown Washington. A Secret Service agent keeps close behind, with the help of a small electric motor. The trees are ablaze across the Potomac as he drops into Georgetown.

Chu winds his way through traffic along the Mall - where one angry motorist leans on the horn - before entering the Energy Department parking garage, right behind his general counsel's red Maserati with the license plate "ENERGY."

Chu's nearly two years as energy secretary have been a sprint of sorts. Until last year, the department spent most of its time and its $26 billion budget as caretaker of the nation's nuclear waste and weapons stockpile. But with rising concerns about climate change and the nation's economy hanging on a precipice, Chu was effectively made the green-energy czar. The stimulus bill gave the agency an extra $36 billion for grants and low-interest loans to jump-start new technologies and greater energy efficiency.

It isn't easy to foster innovation or choose economic winners; many policymakers say government shouldn't even try and that there are better ways to create jobs. But President Obama, egged on by Chu and others, thinks that money can lay the seeds for a more competitive, energy-efficient economy.

Chu - a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, former director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and former professor at Stanford and the University of California at Berkeley - has been in a hurry to get the stimulus money out the door. The sense of urgency is something he has tried to infuse in others. One day in 2009, after biking to the office, he met with a handful of top officials awaiting their swearing-in ceremony.

"Be nice, but don't be patient," he told them, according to one of the officials.

On the road

Earlier this fall, Chu took one of his many one-day trips to visit Energy Department projects and companies or institutes hoping to land funding.

His first stop: Applied Photovoltaics, which is run from a garagelike space in a commercial building in Pennington, N.J. He sits at a small table with the company's directors. The doughnuts go untouched.

One of the founders, Jeff Szczepanski, dressed in a blue blazer and a wide tie with a giant yellow sun, is the salesman, or "eye candy," as he puts it. The other, Robert Lyndall, who sports a graying beard and ponytail, is the engineer. They are looking for money to manufacture thin-film solar cells that can be embedded into construction materials. It isn't a novel idea, but few companies are producing it.

Chu is curious. He asks about amorphous thin film, substrates, efficiency and degradation. Then he wants to know why architects aren't using the panels as roofing material. The answer is a combination of old habits, lack of experience, price - and availability. The Applied Photovoltaics team thinks the market is there.

Aides say Chu's ability to understand and absorb technical information sets him apart from the previous 11 energy secretaries - a financier, three business executives, an admiral, two governors, a U.S. senator and other politicians.

"When was the last time the boss knew more about what he was being briefed on than the people doing the briefing?" said David Sandalow, assistant secretary for policy and international affairs.

In Pennington, Chu is noncommittal about the money. The stimulus bill provides tax credits for companies such as this one, but it needs cash or a grant. Downstairs, a few local reporters are waiting. Chu, standing beside Rep. Rush D. Holt (D-N.J.), puts on his political hat.

"Lots of great things start in garages," he says. "It is ideas like this that will disseminate things like solar."

'Intellectual integrity'

At the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Chu is greeted as something akin to a rock star. Chu earned his Nobel Prize for work he did in New Jersey at Bell Labs, where he figured out how to effectively freeze atomic particles with lasers.

Holt introduces him, saying Chu "brings a level of intellectual integrity that quite frankly the department needed."

Chu's talk spans environmental history, deep-water drilling and energy efficiency. Explaining why electric car batteries are large and heavy, he uses a common measurement of energy and notes that a lithium ion battery stores 0.54 megajoules per kilogram. Body fat has 38 megajoules per kilogram, and kerosene has 43.

He shows temperature records from 1880 to 2009.

"We may not currently understand all the bumps and wiggles, but we understand the overall trend," he says. "What's going to happen is it's going to warm up."

Chu points to a study about Greenland's climate and glaciers.

"This is remarkable data," he says. "The world is changing."

Concern about global climate change helped bring Chu out of the physics lab and classroom and into public policy.

"Many of our best basic scientists realize that this is getting down to a crisis situation," he said in a 2007 interview when promoting a report on climate change.

At Princeton, he projects photos of scientists - such as Enrico Fermi and J. Robert Oppenheimer - who were among the fathers of the atom bomb during World War II. He says climate change poses a new threat to rally against.

"Scientists have come to the service of our country in times of national need," he says.

Chu's scientific bent was unexpectedly useful over the summer, when the Obama administration was desperate to stop the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Chu was dispatched to BP's Houston offices to see what could be done.

He recommended that BP use gamma rays to see into the blowout preventer; its several inches of steel were obscuring other methods of figuring out whether the shear rams were clamping into the drill pipe.

He also tapped into his Stanford network to get names of engineers who could give advice, and he told Obama early on that the flow rate of oil pouring into the gulf might be greater than what BP was letting on. Weeks later, he marveled about how little innovation there was in the deep-water drilling business and how few gauges and backup mechanisms were installed on the blowout preventer.

But his crash course in the perils of offshore drilling has reinforced his concern about energy efficiency and alternatives to fossil fuels.

In his talk at the plasma lab, he says, "We kept going out into deeper and deeper water until we got in deep water."

To fund or not to fund

After Chu's talk, he's taken on a quick tour of the facility, which is seeking to harness nuclear fusion so it can be tapped. Temperatures in fusion experiments can rise to 30 million degrees, three times the surface temperature of the sun. The lab carries out these experiments in devices that confine plasma - a hot, electrically charged gas that is the fuel for fusion energy production - by using magnetic fields inside a vacuum chamber. It's a wildly expensive venture, and the prospects of success are remote.

First, they show Chu a machine with wires heading different directions, like a device having a bad hair day. Then they take him to see the stellarator, which looks like a contemporary sculpture.

"This is the type of machine that will make fusion a reality," one lab official tells Chu.

The project was terminated half built.

"Frank Gehry would be proud," Chu says.

Chu follows along as the director talks about tolerances, magnetic fields, mathematical formulas and alloys. If completed, lab director Stewart Prager says, the project would put the United States in the lead worldwide in fusion research and cost less than alternative approaches.

But the project ran way over budget, and Chu isn't sure the department can deliver the $90 million needed to resume the work.

Later he says, "There is no guarantee that fusion will be a commercial source of energy." Even if he believes in it, he adds, "the question is: Will we be able to build it three times better and less costly in 5, 10 or 15 years?"

His last stop of the day is the Philadelphia Navy Yard, where the Energy Department has decided to devote $122 million over five years to help create an energy "hub," one of three new federally funded research centers nationwide. The idea is dear to Chu, who seems to pine for his years at Bell Labs, where scientists have won a total of seven Nobel Prizes and one team invented the transistor.

But in Philadelphia, minds are focused on jobs. The mayor is there, and so is Gov. Ed Rendell (D), in the closing days of his term. Rendell is a pro, but this isn't Chu's element. He sounds awkward here, telling a story that falls flat about a tenure candidate who went to Penn State instead of Stanford. Still, he finishes with his central message: "This is the kind of center that can propel the country forward."

New obstacles

It remains unclear just what will propel the country's energy policy.

The midterm elections made it harder to push ahead. The department has used up most of the stimulus money. And with the big federal budget deficit, many critics say the department's grants and loans amount to subsidies for renewable energy that shouldn't be extended. Tough publicity lies ahead when some of the beneficiaries, such as new battery or solar-panel manufacturers, inevitably fail - if there were no risk of failure, private money would step up. The first grant recipient, a solar firm, has already delayed some plans.

"We're looking very hard at what would bring [solar-power costs] down by a factor of four," Chu says. "I'm confident that we can reduce it by a factor of two. The last factor of two will be much harder."

In the meantime, many people are judging the energy portions of the stimulus programs on the basis of jobs. Obama has turned to it time and again. A Council of Economic Advisers report in July said nearly 200,000 jobs had been created, impressive in the context of the renewable-energy industry but small when measured against the huge economy.

The bigger picture on climate change is cloudy, too.

The Obama administration's push for climate legislation has hit a brick wall in the Senate. Many lawmakers favored legislation that would have raised the price of oil and coal to discourage their use and make renewable energy more competitive; Chu belongs to that camp. Other lawmakers oppose higher fossil fuel prices, saying it will hurt manufacturers and consumers.

Chu - who lacked the political skills of earlier energy secretary Bill Richardson or the Washington policy stature of Carter-era secretary James R. Schlesinger - has played a minor role in the administration's climate-change efforts. His support for expanding nuclear power has put off many environmentalists who back his renewable agenda. And he has alienated the oil and coal industries as well - he once called coal his "worst nightmare."

"Are we willing to make investments today for our children?" Chu asks. "Or are we going to say we'd rather not increase the price of electricity half a cent a kilowatt hour, because we would rather take the money and spend it today?"

His biggest disappointment, he says, is that "two or three years ago I thought America and the world was really going to break forward and recognize that climate change is important, and now they are backtracking on that. The world economic recession has something to do with that, but the people who are against [climate action] have also tried to muddy the waters."

"Ironically," he adds, "in the last couple of years we know more and every year it gets more compelling."

The physicist sees a clear connection between addressing climate change and U.S. economic interests.

"People don't appreciate what's going on," he says, "that we are laying the groundwork for prosperity."



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

DOE- New Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Advisory Committee



Nov 14, 2010 Energy Central
The U.S. Department of Energy today announced the establishment of the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Advisory Committee (ERAC). ERAC is a federal advisory committee whose members will report directly to the Secretary of Energy with advice on the portfolio of the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). The 19 members selected have experience in a variety of sectors and will bring a range of technical expertise and perspectives to the committee.

"We are fortunate to have such knowledgeable people volunteering their time and efforts to the Department's clean energy endeavors," said Secretary Chu. "They will be contributing their expertise and experience to help address the energy challenges faced by our Nation."

ERAC will periodically review EERE's portfolio and provide advice to the Secretary of Energy on a variety of areas including: completion of long-range plans, priorities and strategies; program funding; and any issues of specific concern expressed by the Secretary of Energy or the Assistant Secretary for EERE. ERAC is expected to meet twice a year; the meetings will be open to the public. The Committee is being established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). DOE also expects to organize various subcommittees under ERAC. For more information on ERAC members visit http://www1.eere.energy.gov/eereadvisorycommittee/

Below are the selected members of the ERAC:

Yet-Ming Chiang

Kyocera Professor of Ceramics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

- - Lonnie Edelheit

Senior Vice President, Research & Development, General Electric Company (Retired)

- - Ira Ehrenpreis

General Partner, Technology Partners

- - Philip Giudice

Commissioner, Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources

- - Hal Harvey

CEO, ClimateWorks Foundation

- - Mark Jacobson

Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Director, Atmosphere/Energy Program, Stanford University

- - Jay Keasling

CEO, Joint BioEnergy Institute and Professor, University of California, Berkeley

- - Neal Lane

The Malcolm Gillis University Professor, Rice University

- - Ed Lazowska

Bill & Melinda Gates Chair in Computer Science & Engineering, University of Washington

- - Richard Lester

Japan Steel Industry Professor, Head of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering, and faculty co-chair and founding Director of the Industrial Performance Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

- - Kathleen McGinty

Operating Partner, Element LLC

- - Arati Prabhakar

Partner, U.S. Venture Partners

- - Stanley Pruss

Partner, 5 Lakes Energy LLC

- - Burton Richter

Paul Pigott Professor in the Physical Sciences Emeritus, Senior Fellow Freeman Spogli Institute of International Studies, Stanford University; and Director Emeritus, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

- - Arthur Rosenfeld

Distinguished Scientist Emeritus, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

- - Janette Sadik-Khan

Commissioner, New York City Department of Transportation

- - Subir Sanyal

President and Manager of Reservoir Engineering Services, GeothermEx, Inc.

- - Maxine Savitz

General Manager, Honeywell/AlliedSignal (Retired)

- - Mark Stoering

Vice President, Portfolio Strategy & Business Development, Xcel Energy

- -



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

World Oil Prediction- Year 2041 or Sooner?

Here is the suggested dates using the Authors Numbers quoted from the Article. Scotty
  • '...131 years for replacement of gasoline and diesel, given the current pace of research and development; however, world's oil could run dry almost a century before that ...'


  • Math: 2010 + 131 = Year 2141  - 100 (century) = Year 2041


2041 - 2010 = 31 Years.

  • Where do you see your energy coming from in the Future? 
    • Leave comments below in comment section. 
    • All comments that are Energy Related and in English will be published. Scotty



It seems the panic time for both green enthusiasts and peak oil pundits.

According to a new paper by two researchers at the University of California – Davis, it would take 131 years for replacement of gasoline and diesel, given the current pace of research and development; however, world's oil could run dry almost a century before that.

The research was published on Nov. 8 at Environmental Science & Technology, which is based on the theory that market expectations are good predictors reflected in prices of publicly traded securities.

By incorporating market expectations into the model, the authors, Nataliya Malyshkina and Deb Niemeier, indicated that based on their calculation, the peak of oil production could occur between 2010 and 2030, before renewable replacement technologies become viable at around 2140.

The estimates not only delayed the alternative energy timeline, but also pushed up the peak oil deadline. The researchers suggest some previous estimates that pegged year 2040 as the time frame when alternatives would start to replace oil, could be "overly optimistic".




    Article continues:  entire article: http://seekingalpha.com/article/236635-oil-the-clock-is-ticking

|  by: Dian L. Chu November 14, 2010  |
About this author:
















    --
    Scott's Contracting
    scottscontracting@gmail.com
    scottscontracting.wordpress.com
    http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com

    11.14.2010

    NBC Green Weekly Programing Links provided by bing



    --
    Scott's Contracting
    scottscontracting@gmail.com
    http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
    http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
    scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

    ensure energy efficiency build using a high-performance strategy

    Energy Equation

    Do your houses leak energy like this one? One way to ensure energy efficiency is to build using a high-performance strategy. These five minimum requirements can maximize returns for you and your buyers.

    Launch Slideshow
    Image

    Energy Equation

    Do your houses leak energy like this one? One way to ensure energy efficiency is to build using a high-performance strategy. These five minimum requirements can maximize returns for you and your buyers.

    Energy Equation
    Do your houses leak energy like this one? One way to ensure energy efficiency is to build using a high-performance strategy. These five minimum requirements can maximize returns for you and your buyers.

    Screenwriter William Goldman once said that in Hollywood, "nobody knows nothing." What he meant, of course, was that no one knows for sure how to make a successful movie or even predict if one will be a financial hit.

    The same, it could be said, goes for building energy-efficient homes. Varying certification requirements, unclear definitions of green building, and competing scientific theories can, and do, lead to confusion and frustration among builders. No one seems to know just the right combination of features that will hit the sweet spot of energy efficiency and profitability.

    In that spirit, we offer five basics of energy-efficient design and construction that make sense to follow no matter what type of house you're building. And techniques that lower utility bills—sealing air leaks, using high-performance windows, and right-sizing HVAC systems—shouldn't be ignored in any economic climate.

    Complicating the picture, builders need to look at each home in the context of its local market, price point, and the availability of products and systems. "It's always best to design for your local climate," says Ed Binkley, the principal of Ed Binkley Design in Oviedo, Fla. "This is the least expensive" way to go, he adds.

    The size of the home is another key variable, says Ann V. Edminster. "I'm a provocateur, so I ask how small a house do you want to build," says the principal and owner of Design AVEnues, a green building consulting firm in Pacifica, Calif. Edminster always recommends simple styles and more consolidated roof lines. Complexity, she says, "adds to the potential for mistakes in insulating, air sealing, and flashing."

    Even builders who follow the basics must often make difficult trade-offs. Specifying solar panels for energy independence may seem like a good idea, but if the budget is tight, the high premium for an array might be better spent on upgraded insulation, good air sealing, or a high-efficiency air conditioner. Tough choices, but no one said this would be easy.

    The following five recommendations are the bare minimum, even with a tight budget. If more money is available, don't forget other important features such as low-energy lighting, water conservation, and good indoor air quality.

    Roof Roof

    The roof is not only the first line of defense against the elements; it is absolutely critical to the energy performance of the home. "Most of your energy loss occurs through the roof," says Binkley. One of the most routine construction methods is a vented roof with a sealed and insulated attic space. The devil, as always, is in the details—in this case creating a good seal between the conditioned space and the attic. Depending on the climate, insulating just below the roof deck—with blown-in foam, for example—might be an easier and higher-performing method, though it may also be more expensive to execute. "We go back and forth on the issue [of a vented attic versus a non-vented]," says Chad Ludeman, president of Philadelphia-based green builder Postgreen, which specializes in eco-friendly homes. Other options include using rigid foam board or radiant barrier sheathing on the exterior of the roof deck, which consultants (and the Energy Department) say cuts down on heat gain in the attic. The bottom line is that you need to pay particular attention to the roof and attic if you want your homes to be comfortable as well as energy efficient.

    Walls of Fame

    Walls may be the next most important factor in a home's energy efficiency. Though most builders use 4-inch studs spaced 16 inches on center, builders of energy-efficient homes in colder climates have upgraded to 6-inch studs spaced at 24 inches. This creates a deeper wall cavity that leaves more room for insulation and raises the total R-value of the wall system. The key in any climate, however, is to completely seal the wall cavity. Though any kind of insulation will work as long as its installed properly, some builders prefer sprayed-in insulation, such as foam or cellulose, despite their higher cost.
    Postgreen is so serious about its walls that it often builds two layers instead of one, a technique that seems like overkill but results in a high-performance shell. "We build two 2x4 walls with a 2-inch space between the two," Ludeman says. "It allows us to get the insulation we want and allows us to get rid of the thermal bridging."
    On the exterior, the company uses an OSB-based sheathing system with a built-in protective overlay, topped by a continuous exterior layer of R-10 rigid foam board. Downsizing HVAC system requirements pays for the added materials. This "could just possibly be the most affordable wall assembly that achieves maximum R-value and minimum thermal bridging," the builder writes on its blog, 100KHouse

    Seal of Approval

    In the eyes of some experts, blocking air movement is the most important energy move builders can make.

    "Air movement is a big issue for us," says C.R. Herro, national vice president of environmental affairs at Scottsdale, Ariz.–based Meritage Homes, which claims to be the only top 10 builder that offers 100 percent Energy Star–qualified homes. Air leakage, especially random air movement through building cavities, can account for 30 percent or more of a home's heating and cooling costs, according to the DOE.
    The first line of defense is to use caulk to seal cracks, gaps, and joints, especially at the connections and elements that penetrate the building envelope. Couple that with an air barrier that has been taped at the seams—which improves the performance by 20 percent—and you have a pretty air-tight, inexpensive building envelope. But the efficiency of this barrier is heavily dependent on how well the shell is sealed and the wrap is installed and taped.

    The same performance may be achieved with more reliability by using one of the whole-home air sealing and insulation systems that manufacturers such as Owens Corning or Knauf have introduced recently. Another, even more effective approach—which also happens to be the priciest—is to use spray foam insulation. This approach may be three times more expensive than other methods, but green building consultants say it leaves little to chance. Plus, with an R-value approaching 6 per inch, your walls will be well insulated.

    Insulation Nation

    Every builder has a preference when it comes to insulation. Most swear by inexpensive batt insulation, but others say the product performs well only when it's properly installed. "I never recommend batt," Edminster says. "It's almost impossible to do a good job installing batt insulation. It's a good idea in theory, but in practice it's a nightmare to do well and certainly not fast."

    At the other extreme, foam insulates very well by completely sealing wall cavities. But it is often highly impractical in production housing because of its cost. For that reason, some builders have resorted to a hybrid system that includes batt insulation, good air sealing, and, as a back up (and to stop thermal bridging), rigid foam board on the home exterior.
    Whatever insulation you choose, Edminster says, "it should touch on all six sides (full contact) of the wall cavity." Also, the DOE says it's important to exceed local building codes that probably only include minimum requirements that likely will not result in a truly energy-efficient and high-performance home.

    Windows on the World

    Today nearly every builder selects insulated, low-E, Energy Star windows. But it is important to think about fenestration in a broader context, too. Window placement is just as important as window performance. Unfortunately, that may be dictated by how subdivisions are planned. Even so, exposing windows to direct sunlight is unacceptable, Binkley cautions. Thoughtful placement can do more to cut down on heat gain than a low-E coating. And make sure that windows that do have some exposure to the sun also have appropriate overhangs or protection devices such as trees or exterior shades. Postgreen prefers fiberglass windows for their durability and good looks, and the company avoids certain types of styles. "We use casement windows because they give you a tighter seal [when they are closed], and we avoid using double-hungs or products with a lot of framing," Ludeman explains. "The casement gives you more insulated glass and less framing that can cause thermal bridging." Yes, casement windows do cost more, he says, but to balance it out, the company also uses a combination of operable and fixed glass openings—about 30 percent to 40 percent—that cuts costs significantly.

    --
    Scott's Contracting
    scottscontracting@gmail.com
    http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com

    Connect with Scotts Contracting

    FB FB Twitter LinkedIn Blog Blog Blog Blog Pinterest

    Featured Post

    Perfect Aircrete, Kitchen Ingredients.