Posted on

Business Commute Challenge – Follow-Up

In my previous Business Commute Challenge 2011 post, I kind of put the carrot out there and challenged myself to see if I could ride my bike to work every day for a month. Not just the one week of the BCC, but until June 10.

Today’s June 10 and I want to report back to you that I made it.

Well, almost.

During the month between May 10 and June 10, I only drove my car to work two days. I rode my bike all the other days. To and from work. To and from meetings. I logged 224 miles on my bike. Which means I saved about $40 in gasoline, lost about 5 pounds and got some pretty good workouts.

The two days I drove were the two days right after Memorial Day weekend. I got a bad cold over the weekend and was still feeling sick Tuesday and Wednesday. I didn’t feel like riding. Hey, I was having trouble breathing and was coughing just sitting still. So I drove.

But the point isn’t that I didn’t exactly make my goal. The point is I think I enjoy biking even more now than when I started. Fair enough, we’ve had some pretty mild weather this last month. Very little rain (at least in the mornings coming in and the evenings going home). But I enjoy riding even more now than a month ago.

And, also fair enough, Eugene, Oregon, where I live has to have some of the best bike paths, lanes and streets of any community I know. So when it’s easier to get somewhere by bike, we are more likely to ride. And I have to admit, riding past a line of cars stuck in traffic has a certain feeling to it that’s a little hard to describe.

And riding along the Ruth Bascom Riverbank Trail bike/pedestrian path and enjoying the fresh, crisp morning air, chirping birds, pooping geese (well, I could live without the pooping geese, but the goslings are cute), and the spring flowers has a certain feeling, too, that is kind of hard to describe.

I’m finding I like biking better than driving. Not being stuck in traffic, inhaling exhaust fumes, enduring tense, uptight drivers. Oh, there are the few bikers and pedestrians that are uptight, but they are the few. And some of my biking is along a busy street, so I suck my share of fumes. But I have some good gear: a good helmet, rain gear, wrap-around eye glasses and wonderful saddle bags.

For me, at this point, it’s become less about saving gas, having a smaller carbon footprint, polluting less and more about sheer enjoyment.

So I’m REALLY hooked now. I’ll check back with you on July 10 and give you all another update.

Posted on

Energy Subsidies and the “Free Market”

Time and time again, I hear people say that renewables should be subject to the “free market” and should not receive government subsidies. After all, if renewables such as solar, wind and geothermal are viable, the consumer should decide, not the government. And while I understand (and even to a point agree) with those comments, the problem is we simply don’t have a level playing field. Nor do we have (or will we ever have) a truly free market economy. As Wikipedia says, “purely free markets… are theoretical constructs.” So after a recent spate of posts on a couple of threads on my Facebook page, I thought I would address some of the issues that came up.

PURPOSE OF SUBSIDIES
I think the purpose of subsidies is to get fledgling industries off the ground so they can be viable. Call it investment capital, call it what you want, that’s how our culture works. Entrepreneurs have an idea and get investors and/or tax breaks for a period of time so they can build a good foundation and become productive. There is often a huge amount of research and development costs associated with a start-up company. And I’ll be the first to say I’m not an economist. But I will go on to say this isn’t rocket science, either.

The chart I’ve included with this post is based on a 2009 report by the Environmental Law Institute report titled “Estimating U. S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002-2008.” The source of the information in the report comes from the Internal Revenue Service, the US Department of Energy, the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation and the US Department of Agriculture. The report covers the 6-year cumulative period of 2002-2008.

It’s a telling chart because it shows just how disproportionate the playing field really is. 72% of Federal subsidies for energy go to fossil fuels, not renewables. And if you group biofuel in with the fossil fuels (I do; biofuel is stupid), it’s more like 88%. The report goes into a great amount of detail regarding how the subsidies are parsed out.

Historically, a large amount of the subsidies for fossil fuel goes to coal. You know, the same people who brought you mountaintop removal. And black lung disease (and those suffering from it also are subsidized). Oil companies also receive a huge amount of subsidies for off-shore drilling costs, foreign exploration credits and the like.

But I guess my point here is that oil and coal have received subsidies for decades and at least the oil companies, who realistically hold a monopoly over us, are still seeing record profits. It seems subsidies should help companies get established, then phase out, not add on to profits. And the argument that we need to look at how much tax the oil companies pay would be valid if they weren’t paying tax on money we give them. Would you be willing to pay $300 tax on my gift of $1,000 to you? I sure would.

ON AGAIN/OFF AGAIN
In the 1980s, there were some pretty substantial tax credits (yes, subsidies) for solar. During that time, my parents installed a solar hot water system on their house. It’s still plugging along, churning out hot water. Then the Federal credits expired in 2000, 2002, 2004 and almost in 2008. They’ve currently been renewed through 2016.

But in my home state of Oregon, with one of the most aggressive tax credit programs around, the Legislature may look at eliminating them.

It’s this on again/off again situation that never allows any renewable energy company to ever really get off the ground. Why can’t we commit to a consistent subsidy for renewables over 20 or 25 years? It’s that see-saw effect, much like Roland Martin said in his blog about gasoline prices posted here a while back. And it essentially is strangling any hope of renewable energy ever coming close to competing with Big Oil.

LOOK PAST OUR NOSE
It’s the short-sighted view we have, where we don’t look past our nose to the future. We have these spurts of knee-jerk reactions when things get “bad” then fall into complacency when it evens out temporarily.

We can’t keep living like that. If we evened out the subsidies and shifted $30 billion of the oil subsidies to renewables, it would help. I believe even with fossil fuels’ head start, that shift alone, if continued consistently for 20 years, would make renewables viable and an integral part of our culture. And it would go a long way toward leveling that playing field.

Is anyone willing to give it a try?

Posted on

NewWood – A Revolutionary Idea

As a stark contrast to the Numi toilet I recently panned, I’m totally excited about the concept behind NewWood. Starting with a nuclear power plant in Washington that was never completed or brought online, some very resourceful entrepreneurs have come up with what just could be one of the most revolutionary ideas to come along in a very long time.

Taking a mix of 50% recycled wood and 50% recycled plastic, they have started production (just within the last few days) on a 4×8 sheet that could replace much of the way we currently make plywood and sheet goods for underlayment, etc.

We spoke with Steve Pottle, from NewWood and are getting some samples. Our primary thought is to use them in our kit homes endeavor for developing countries, World3Homes. We had been looking for a sheet good that was durable, insect and moisture resistant, flexible for earthquake resistance, lightweight and economical. So far as we can tell, NewWood fits the bill on all counts.

What excites me about NewWood is the wood comes from wood waste that would have gone into the landfills, like some construction demolition waste, so it’s appropriate to be taking that material and reusing it in buildings. The plastic comes from plastic bottles and bags that may or may not get recycled (there seems to be plenty of it to go around). And the factory is recycled, too — a nuclear power plant never finished that was going to be a manufacturing facility that never started in an area of Washington with chronic unemployment.

The other thing about NewWood that I appreciate is NewWood itself is 100% recyclable. When it has served its useful life, or someone remodels, NewWood can be broken down and recycled again and again.

That’s truly forward-thinking. Once I get my sample and we have a chance to try it in our first World3Homes prototype, I’ll revisit this and let you know how it performs. Oh, and thanks to Preston Koerner from JetsonGreen; that’s where I first heard about NewWood.

Posted on

Kohler Numi Toilet

Unbelievable. Technology is going to save us once and for all. For a price.

As seen in USA Today, a new customizable “smart toilet” is being brought to the US market the end of this month. Called the “Numi”, Kohler’s new toilet is billed as “a perfect blend of technology, performance, and design.” It comes complete with “adjustable heated seat and foot warmer too, plus an integrated stainless steel, self-cleaning bidet wand with a dryer. A motion-controlled seat and lid can automatically open when you approach and close when you split. Tripping a bar of light on the floor to the side of the toilet automatically raises the seat, while the toilet automatically flushes when walking away.”

It comes in white or biscuit and has a remote control that can be programmed for up to six individual users. And it can be yours for only $6,300. So while it may be a perfect blend of technology, performance, and design, cost obviously isn’t part of the “blend.” It is dual flush with 0.6 or 1.28 gallons per flush, so there is one redeeming factor with this toilet.

But that’s the only one.

Posted on

Zero Waste and the Johnsons

I came across this video at JetsonGreen and just had to share it.

I first heard of the Johnsons via a friend sharing the link to her zero waste home blog and was intrigued by Bea’s take on the three Rs. Before you ever get to reduce, reuse or recycle, you should refuse, refuse, refuse. This is a concept I can completely support. I’ve often shared how we are such a consumer-driven society that we buy, buy, buy and really need to be stepping back and evaluating our lifestyles. That’s part of what I’ve tried to share here at thesimpleHOUSE.

I’m encouraged and humbled by the Bea and Scott. This gives me even more to strive for.

Posted on

The Lawrence Street House – Bidding and LEED

I know it’s been a little while since I gave you all an update on the Lawrence House. With the holidays, I took a bit longer finishing the drawings and we really didn’t want to have to be doing open houses during the Thanksgiving and Christmas season. Open Houses are actually kind of a pain. Clean the house, keep it spotless, etc. for a two to three hour window on a Sunday afternoon. So we rested that for a while.

BIDDING
I also got the drawings done and ready to go out to bid. Based on my original budget, we had our present house priced at where we needed to be for a little negotiation and be able to go straight across. Part of the triple bottom line (the three “E’s” of sustainability) is economy and we didn’t want to end up with a mortgage when it’s all said and done.

But I’ve been getting preliminary bids back and they are actually coming in under my original budget (which, frankly, was pretty generous). So now we’re starting to get pretty excited. This may actually happen! We’re also currently at 5kw for the solar and are considering 6kw. We have room on the roof and believe it’s the right thing to do.

LEED
We had our first official LEED preliminary rating meeting Friday. This is where we sat down with Eli, our LEED rater, our landscape architect and our mechanical contractor. We’ve already done the design charrette and this is to make sure the major players understand the ground rules for LEED and also what we expect. Third party verification requires some stringent guidelines and we want to do it right from from the beginning. We should easily make Platinum on each house.

We discussed the mechanical systems and how they needed to be designed and installed. The way we are insulating our house, we are foaming the tops of the roof rafters so the heat pump indoor units and the ductwork will be within the conditioned space. That way we don’t have to insulate the ducts and it also makes the system run much more efficiently. We’ll still seal the ducts (the major area of mechanical system inefficiencies) and everything will be ceiling-fed.

We’re thinking the cottage will use a mini-split unit, or ductless heat pump. This is much more efficient, especially in a 776 sq ft house. The main house will have a conventional heat pump, but just a very high efficiency one.

Our landscaping is all low irrigation demand. We discussed at length eco lawn versus regular turf versus synthetic turf. We have just about 3% lawn area, but LEED, to maximize the points, doesn’t allow irrigation or mowing, otherwise you lose those two points. I’ve said all along we won’t chase points, but this is an area we want to be sure we do it right and also have something we will enjoy. An eco lawn in the location we have this might not be what we want. Our landscape architect suggested a synthetic lawn (I know, my first thought is “Astro-Turf“). We are going to go look at one here in town, but I’m skeptical about it. The term “Fake Lawn” is what comes off my lips. I’ll keep you posted.

SUMMARY
So that’s where we’re at. I’m hopeful we’ll have the bids come in well and we can get this house sold and start building. The prime building season in Eugene (March – September) is fast approaching.

Posted on

Good Earth Home Show 2011

This was the second year, we were at the Good Earth Home Garden and Living Show. My architectural firm, Arbor South Architecture had a booth last year and we did it again this year.

This was also the second year we did a seminar. In 2010, we talked about our award-winning LEED Platinum home, theSAGE. This year, I was asked to speak again as part of an Architect focus. By the time I was asked, the topics of building a smaller house, energy efficiency (specifically via the Passivhaus concept) and why to hire an Architect were already taken. So I thought I’d share some of my thoughts that I’ve been sharing with you all here on my blog.

So if you attended the seminar today and enjoyed it, thank you; I enjoyed presenting it. I know the topics were a bit circular and not linear, but as I mentioned, everything is connected. And when everything is connected, it’s very hard to go in a straight line. This affects that and so on. But it’s rewarding to realize how one thing we do can affect another, which in turn can affect yet another. It kind of makes the shift in our paradigm and lifestyle choices all worth it.

I appreciated your questions and comments today. I do welcome your comments on the seminar. What you liked and even what you didn’t like. I also encourage your suggestions on what I should talk about next. Topic ideas are always helpful. For those who are interested, Click Here for my Front Porch article.

Thank you for allowing me to present you with a “shameless plug” for this blog. And again, thanks again for attending!

Posted on

Will We Ever REALLY get an EV?

Well, the Detroit Auto Show started Sunday. The Chevrolet Volt was just named Motor Trend’s Car of the Year for 2011. And I’m getting really really cynical. I know the picture for this post isn’t a Chevy Volt. But more on that a little later.

When I was a teenager, I subscribed to Motor Trend. I loved looking at the latest cool ideas coming out for cars. My first car was a 1974 Chevy Nova. Bright Red. SS. 350 4-barrell 4-speed. Mag wheels. White letter tires. 8 miles to the gallon. Then gas went to 75 cents a gallon and I felt the pinch. So I bought a sports car: a baby blue Porsche 914. 23 miles per gallon in town and 32 mpg on the road. That was 1975.

I had that car for a long time. Actually until we had our daughter. Then, in 1985, after 10 years and 120,000 miles, I traded it off. Three people and a two-seater car just wasn’t practical. So we got a Toyota Corolla. A lot less sexy. But it got about 23 mpg in town and about 30 mpg on the road. And we could all go places as a family.

Fast forward to 2003. I now have a Volkswagen Beetle. An awe-inspiring 23 mpg in town and about 28 to 30 mpg on the road. Do you see where this is going?

In the last 35 years, small car gas mileage has realistically stayed pretty static. Even a Hybrid Prius (the best mileage car out there) only gets about 50 miles per gallon (most small cars get about 23 mpg in town and 30 mpg on the road at best). So in 35 years, we’ve managed to increase gas efficiency by about double in the best case scenario. While gas prices have quadrupled.

The concept of electric cars has intrigued me. I watched the movie “Who Killed the Electric Car?” and was maddened and was tempted to become cynical. I was hopeful when I heard about the Chevy Volt. Finally, an all-electric car made in the good old U.S. of A. The original media on the Volt was it would be all-electric.

Then, my cynicism returned: The Volt would end up with a gas generated back-up. My heart sank. Did Chevy cave to “range anxiety?” Or is there some sort of conspiracy? (GM actually wants to trademark the term “range anxiety”… now THAT makes as much sense as Apple wanting to trademark the lower case letter i). The Nissan Leaf EV is coming soon (we hope). Maybe. Still in the reservation stage. But it’s actually kind of ugly. Sorry, Nissan.

So I turned to the Th!nk City, a Norwegian car that has been throughout Europe for years, is ALL electric and has a range of about 100 miles. And it’s pleasing to the eye. Please bring the Th!nk to the USA! They say they’re going to. I’m on “the list.” But, honestly, I’m not holding my breath.

Which leads me to the Ford Focus EV shown above. All electric (as of today). Coming to showrooms near us this Fall (we hope). Made in the USA. Please, Ford, don’t cave to range anxiety (GM may own the term anyway…).

Be bold and go for it. I think I’d sell my Beetle for one.

Posted on

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #7

at least it's an honest fake...
GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #7 – THE SIN OF WORSHIPPING FALSE LABELS
This sin is a relatively new one to the report. According to terrachoice, this sin “is committed by a product that, through either words or images, gives the impression of third-party endorsement where no such endorsement actually exists; fake labels, in other words.” So in my ever diligent research mode, I set out to find some of those fake labels.

But then I thought I’ve been trying to get you all to do some of this for yourselves (after all, many of you don’t know me; how reliable am I, anyway?). So I thought I’d post an obviously-fake label to show how ludicrous things can get. I’d bet that I could put the above label on a product and some people would buy it thinking it was actually sustainable, green and eco-friendly. It’s similar to the label on the “organic cigarettes” in my post regarding Sin #5 where they were actually honest in saying “No additives in our tobacco does NOT mean a safer cigarette.” They’re actually quite upfront and “honest” about it, but we still buy the product. Why is that?

I’m reminded of the old bumper sticker that says “If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

We have reached the final sin of greenwashing published by terrachoice in their report titled “The Seven Sins of Greenwashing”. It’s been an interesting journey for me. I have always enjoyed research and finding out the underlying facts to any claim or “news” story. I hope you have enjoyed this series, too.

I’ll leave you with this charge: Don’t get outraged, just pay attention and take the time and energy needed to check it out. And that applies to whatever “it” is.

Posted on

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #6

GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #6 – THE SIN OF FIBBING
Outright lying drives me nuts. I can understand stretching the truth (although I don’t agree with it or condone it), but deliberately messing with the numbers or stats to give a result you want is not acceptable. Period.

Early in 2010, LG Electronics, maker of the refrigerator pictured above admitted to using an illegal device on some of its refrigerators to skew the energy saving results. It’s interesting because the refrigerator actually uses MORE electricity to operate and could endanger your food. So not only was LG lying, it appears they don’t care about your health and safety as much as they care about their energy label.

There was also apparently another instance of a manufacturer putting the big yellow Energy Star guide on their dryer. Does anyone know what’s wrong with that picture? (hint: dryers don’t have Energy Star labels).

As with everything that we read, see or hear, I believe it is our responsibility to check out all claims as best we can from reliable sources. This won’t be a fool-proof 100% guarantee, but I can tell you I’ve easily found the information I’ve wanted for about 95% of the cases I’ve tried to check. That means the correct data is out there and relatively easy to find. We just have to go looking for it. The manufacturers who outright fib are betting we don’t.

And, judging from most of the political stuff ( I thought of a few other, less kind words) out there I’ve heard over the last couple of years, the manufacturers will win that bet; we won’t go looking for that information.

Next Post: Sin #7 – The Sin of Worshipping False Labels