Grid Parity - Tipping Point For Change

   While grid parity is where things are headed there are still many obstacles - starting with dollars and dollars of utility money to fight it. Start in Arizona to see the aggressive tactics used by utilities against grid parity. Grid parity will allow on-site power generation by independent and very small producers (a household) to be part of the discussion of the future of energy production in the United States, instead of  beening dismissed as insignificant. 
   Quality improvements and cost declines in batteries, as the article reports, are a major tipping point to make on-site surplus power generation practical for a growing number of people and businesses. While not mentioned in the article, there are recent significant performance improvements in small scale wind power production systems designed for residential rooftop mounting. With further price drops, a system that combines rooftop solar and wind electric production with battery backup becomes a practical goal for an urban dweller - not just off-the-grid back-to-the-hills people. Adding a solar hot water component further reduces off-site power needs.
    As more individual households become energy producers, the two-way potential of the grid begins to be realized. Up until now, the grid is primarily seen as a one-way street to the consumer. Deregulation has divided distribution from production but a lot of the same folks are still around and they would be happy if it stayed a one-way street. The continuing rise in on-site power production pushes the envelope though. I see two basic realities - first, less distributed power means less revenue and taxes and second, if a micro power producer wants to sell their power, they must be connected to the grid. Connection will cost money. Clearly a realignment of the present utilities vs. solar people paradigm is needed - the grid needs re-imagining with an emphasis on who is to receive the benefit - is it a democratic thing because everyone basically needs it or is it prone to corporate bottle-necks or choke points? 
   The inherent benefit of household power production is people keeping their money - the elimination of the massive wealth transfer from individuals to the corporations that control electricity production and distribution. People do not give up money streams without resistance. Corporations will go to great lengths to protect what they consider to be theirs. Grid parity is change - for forward looking people, it is a key element in a tipping point that can have significant effects on corporate and government revenues. Just as there are currently winners and losers, there are winners and losers to come. Hopefully these issues will soon be more commonly part of the discussion for everyone.
      

Grid parity: Why electric utilities should struggle to sleep at night

By Matt McFarland, Updated: March 25 at 9:02 am

What’s good news for those concerned with climate change, and bad news for electric utilities? That’s grid parity, which is sometimes called socket parity. It exists when an alternative energy source generates electricity at a cost matching the price of power from the electric grid.

As grid parity becomes increasingly common, renewable energy could transform our world and slow the effects of climate change. Advances in solar panels and battery storage will make it more realistic for consumers to dump their electric utility, and power their homes through solar energy that is stored in batteries for cloudy days.

“I think the grid gets disrupted,” said NRG Energy chief executive David Crane. “The only question is do you want to be the disruptor or do you want to get disrupted.”

Our world is increasingly cordless, and power appears likely to follow. While we’re not there yet, the momentum behind distributed energy is building.

The Rocky Mountain Institute has said that tens of millions of commercial and residential customers will have grid parity by 2030 and perhaps 2020. Hawaii is already there as a result of high energy costs associated with being an island.

Other estimates are more aggressive. A 2013 Deutsche Bank report said that 10 states are currently at grid parity: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Vermont. According to a 2013 note by Citi Research, Germany, Spain, Portugal and Australia have reached grid parity.

This shift has benefited from a dramatic drop in the price of solar panels, which dropped 97.2 percent from 1975 to 2012, according to GTM Research.

For electric utilities to truly be challenged, batteries are just as important as solar panels. With batteries excess energy could be stored. Tesla announced in February it’s building a gigafactory, which it envisions producing more lithium ion batteries by 2020 than were produced worldwide in a 2013. The scale of the operation should drive down prices further (Tesla estimates over 30 percent). Some of these batteries will be used by SolarCity, a leader in installing residential solar panels.

SolarCity has a pilot program in California, in which batteries store solar power. It has complained that electric utilities are slowing its rollout. NRG Energy hopes to have a similar product available by the end of 2014.

If utilities are dragging their feet on SolarCity’s initiative, it’s easy to understand why. As solar energy gets cheaper, traditional electric utilities are doing the opposite. The cost of maintaining the electric grid has gotten more expensive, but reliability hasn’t improved. The investments of electrical utilities appear to be poorly spent.

If customers leave electric utilities, it starts a downward spiral. Fewer customers will mean higher rates, which encourages remaining customers to jump ship for a solar-battery system.

Electric utilities appear poorly equipped for how technology will transform the energy industry. For years there hasn’t been an incentive to innovate, in part due to a lack of competition. Plus, making their product cheaper means less revenue, so why innovate?
Meanwhile, energy upstarts are led by forward thinkers with disruptive track records and eyes on society’s big problems, such as climate change and our dependence on fossil fuels for energy. SolarCity chairman Elon Musk co-founded PayPal and leads Tesla, which could transform the auto industry.
NRG’s Crane speaks of having his company mentioned in the same breath as Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google. It’s radical to imagine anyone feeling passionate about their source of power, but environmental concerns may make it common soon. New devices such as Nest’s popular thermostat are making consumers rethink what to expect from the companies and gadgets that manage their energy.
Crane highlighted the climate change concerns in a recent letter to shareholders: “The day is coming when our children sit us down in our dotage, look us straight in the eye, with an acute sense of betrayal and disappointment in theirs, and whisper to us, ‘You knew… and you didn’t do anything about it. Why?’”

© The Washington Post Company

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2014/03/25/grid-parity-why-electric-utilities-should-struggle-to-sleep-at-night/

How To Get To A More Energy Efficient House - UK Struggles

This article touches on a number of issues and includes a lot of info. For example, "fuel poverty" and the relation of energy costs in the UK and housing that is designed for poor energy efficiency.

Osborne plan to cut energy efficiency funds for fuel poor is 'unforgivable'

Government's own adviser on fuel poverty says chancellor's attack on Energy Company Obligation is 'completely inequitable'

• Damian Carrington
• theguardian.com, Friday 11 October 2013 02.00 EDT

George Osborne's plan to cut financial support for energy efficiency in poorer households is an "unforgivable" attack, according to the government's own adviser on fuel poverty.
With a political row raging over soaring energy bills, inflamed further by an 8% rise from the "big six" energy company SSE on Thursday, Osborne and No 10 sources have repeatedly indicated that the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) is being targeted for cuts or delays to reduce the government levies imposed on consumer energy bills.
But Derek Lickorish, chair of the government's Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, said: "It is completely inequitable to attack the only measure that is doing something for the fuel poor in England. It is unforgivable when we have energy prices that are going only in one direction."
In a letter to No 10, the Treasury and energy departments, seen by the Guardian, Lickorish labels the cuts "perverse", arguing that the fastest and cheapest way of reducing energy bills is through better insulation of the UK's ageing and draughty housing stock.
On Friday the business secretary, Vince Cable, said it would be "short-sighted and foolish" to ditch green levies that make up just under 10% of the average bill.
"The rise in energy prices is due to a whole variety of things, by far the most important of which is what's happening in world energy markets," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
"We've had over a period of years very rapidly rising demand in Asia, particularly in China. We've had restrictions on supply from countries like Iran. A combination of these things has pushed up oil and gas prices and that is what has fed through to consumers."

His comments followed a suggestion from the CEO of SSE, Alistair Phillips-Davies, that his company's 8.2% price hike announced on Thursday was "helpful" to focus the nation's spending priorities.
Phillips-Davies told the Daily Telegraph: "A price rise is never a good thing to do, but if it focuses everyone on to a debate about what we as a nation should be spending money on, then in one way it will be helpful.
"We need to think about what people really want to pay for; maybe it's time to retreat from decarbonisation and focus more on the cost of living. I think we have to have a debate about it.
"Do we want to be replacing one bit of [energy] generation that we can keep going for a bit longer with a new bit of generation that's going to cost more?"
According to the Department of Energy and Climate Change, the ECO costs billpayers £1.3bn a year and makes up 4% – or £47 – of an average annual energy bill.

The Lib Dem energy secretary, Ed Davey, launched a pre-emptive strike against cuts to the ECO on Tuesday by writing to energy companies, most of whom oppose the ECO scheme, demanding greater transparency over how much the policy actually costs them to implement.

Companies including SSE and the British Gas owner Centrica have warned that the ECO could add £100 a year to bills due to the cost of finding eligible households. About half of the ECO funding is targeted at those receiving welfare benefits, including pensioners, disabled people and jobseekers.
A Lib Dem source said the party would try to block Conservative cuts to the ECO: "The scheme is about improving the energy efficiency of the homes of poorer people and pensioners. If anyone is saying let's rip up ECO and stop thousand and thousands of homes getting energy efficiency measures … it's not happening." Conservative sources declined to comment. The coalition partners are also in dispute over the subsidies given to renewable energy.
Lickorish, who worked in the energy industry for more than 40 years including a period at energy giant EDF, said: "It's devastating how much energy prices have outstripped incomes. Fuel poverty has increased and it is well known that this is a contributory factor to the UK's unenviable record of winter deaths. We fully expect those deaths to have risen when the new figures are announced in November."
Jenny Saunders, chief executive of National Energy Action and a signatory of the letter, said: "The main reason our energy bills are so high is because we have some of the most energy-inefficient housing stock in Europe. ECO is the one policy that is helping cut fuel bills now rather than address longer term security of supply and reducing carbon to tackle climate change. It is vital we use ECO funds to improve heating and insulation for our poorest citizens."
On Thursday, SSE stated: "This year's ECO costs per customer will be over 5% higher than those of the similar government-imposed schemes last year". The company said the "cost of delivering ECO is expected to continue to increase as the scheme goes on". In a letter to party leaders on 1 October, SSE's Phillips-Davies proposed shifting the current £110 of annual green and social policy costs from customer bills into general taxation, "shifting the cost away from those [in fuel poverty] who can't afford to pay and on to those who can."
Lickorish agreed: "The most progressive way to pay for these measures would be through general taxation."
The National Insulation Association (NIA) warned on Thursday that the government's energy efficiency measures were "currently not delivering as expected by government with cavity wall installations 65% down and solid wall insulation over 70% down". In contrast to energy companies' call for a delay on meeting ECO targets, the NIA urged acceleration of ECO delivery.
Graphic: Paul Scruton for the Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/11/osborne-plan-cut-energy-company-obligation

Aiming 4 Zero

Feature: Absolute Zero

Despite the downturn, home builders take lead role in energy and water efficiency.

Source: BIG BUILDER Magazine
Publication date: 2011-07-01

By Steve Doyle and Cary Lowe

Photo: Courtesy Toll Brothers

SOLAR STRATEGY: Toll Brothers is making solar panels available on homes in several of its communities, including Vista del Verde in Yorba Linda, Calif. The solar panels don't add extra dollars to the sales price since they are owned by a third party and leased to the homeowners.

In most endeavors, striving for a score of zero is a fool's errand.

In green home building, however, it is the gold standard. The trick is to keep it from becoming fool's gold.

Despite the housing downturn and its drag on home builders, real progress has been made toward achieving the goal of building homes that consume no net energy. Unquestionably, some of this progress has been forced by the government. Still, the home building industry, battered as it has been, is taking a leading role in the movement toward reducing consumption of energy and water resources. It is realistic to expect that, over the next few years, energy use in new homes will approach zero, and water use will drop to a level one could call insignificant.

Using California as a case study, consider how far the industry has come. Homes built in the last few years use 25 percent less energy, and generate 25 percent less greenhouse gas emissions, than those built just 20 years ago. This results from relatively simple improvements in building materials, construction techniques, insulation, and appliances.

Similarly, recently constructed homes use one-third less water indoors than those built in the mid-1970s, simply due to installation of more efficient fixtures. These are production homes, using standard features. The numbers are even more impressive for homes which incorporate custom, high-efficiency features, and photovoltaic or other onsite power generation facilities.

New homes in California account for a growth of only about 1 percent of the total housing stock in a given year during strong economic times—and only a third of that during the current recession. About 60 percent of homes statewide predate any meaningful energy conservation requirements, and more than 80 percent predate water-conservation standards. Achieving significant improvements in energy and water efficiency in the residential stock would require retrofitting large numbers of those older homes. That will happen over time, driven by the utility cost savings associated with such efficiencies.

Meanwhile, new housing stock begins to demonstrate the efficiencies that can be achieved and, over time, R&D in new-home building will gradually make them more affordable.

Much of this improvement in home efficiency has been driven by changes in the California Building Standards Code, contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. What began as a set of standards and requirements related to safety and structural integrity has evolved to address environmental issues of concern to the state and its residents. This has focused most heavily on achieving greater energy efficiency.

The need for space heating and cooling has been dramatically reduced by more efficient air-conditioning units, improved wall and attic insulation, heat-resistant windows, better sealing of ductwork, and passive energy design systems. Energy use related to domestic water has been reduced through more efficient water heaters, recirculating hot water systems, and insulated pipes. Electrical demand has been further reduced by installation of more efficient lighting fixtures and domestic appliances. (On the other hand, increasing consumer desire for the newest and best in electronic gadgetry continually adds to the per-person demand for electrical power.)

In recent years, as water supply has become an increasingly critical consideration in connection with new development, Title 24 has focused on water conservation as well, setting standards for more efficient plumbing fixtures and water-using appliances.

Photo: Brookfield Homes

Energy conservation:-Tight ducts (less than 6% leakage) -Radiant barrier roof sheathing-Tankless water heaters-R-30 or 38 ceiling insulation-Low-E windowsRenewable energy: -Photovoltaic solar panels (optional)Water conservation: -WaterSense bath faucets-Low-flow showerheads-Tankless water heaters-Insulated hot water loop lines-Water-sensitive landscaping-Dual-flush toilets (optional)

Photo: Brookfield Homes

How LowCan You Go? Houses in Brookfield Homes' Rockrose community extend 35 percent above California's energy-efficiency standards. The eco-savvy homes focus on energy efficiency, water conservation, indoor air quality, as well as other environmentally friendly features. As part of Brookfield's focus on water conservation and environmentally friendly features, its Rockrose community showcases native and drought-tolerant plants. The builder also engages prospective home buyers with its sales office displays that tell its eco-savvy story.

This trend toward increasing conservation and efficiency requirements was accelerated by enactment of A.B. 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act, in 2006. With about 22 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in California attributable to residential and commercial buildings, clamping down further on energy consumption is vital to meeting the emissions reduction standards of A.B. 32.

That has been a prime driver behind the California Green Building Standards Code, now incorporated into Title 24. As part of a broad array of environmentally friendly building requirements, the new code includes requirements for accurate sizing of heating and cooling systems, sealing and insulation of ductwork, and sealing of openings between conditioned and unconditioned space. It also includes changes for plumbing fixtures that will result in a 20 percent reduction in potable water use, as well as weather or moisture-based outdoor irrigation controllers.

In addition to satisfying environmental regulatory requirements, these kinds of features will produce substantial cost savings for homeowners. The average California household consumes about 5,900 kilowatt hours per year. Based on typical utility rates, reducing their electrical consumption by one-third would result in an annual savings of about $375. Because electrical rates are tiered, with higher per-unit costs for higher levels of consumption, a household using 10,000 kilowatt hours per year would save nearly $1,000 annually.

Similarly, a typical new single-family home consumes about 59,000 gallons of indoor potable water and about 115,000 gallons for outdoor irrigation annually. Reducing the indoor use by 20 percent pursuant to the new code, combined with an achievable reduction of 40 percent in outdoor irrigation, would save about $300 annually. Again, because of tiered water rates, the savings would be much greater for homes with more fixtures and more landscaping.

Some home builders are taking the quest for efficiency significantly further. Brookfield Homes' Rockrose community in Carlsbad, Calif., is incorporating standard features that reduce energy consumption by 35 percent below Title 24 requirements. These features include radiant barrier roofs, more thermal-resistant windows, quality installation of insulation, insulated and tightly sealed ductwork, tankless water heaters, and highefficiency furnaces. Photovoltaic solar panels are available as an option.

Water consumption is reduced further by the use of dual-flush toilets, looped and insulated hot water lines, high-efficiency irrigation controllers, and drought-resistant landscaping.

Other builders are trying different approaches.

Toll Brothers is introducing a variety of energy-saving options but is focusing particularly on renewable energy generation. The company is making photovoltaic solar panels available on homes in several projects, including in the Vista del Verde community in Yorba Linda, Calif., at no increase in sales price, by having the panels owned by a third party and leased to homeowners, who then receive lower-cost electricity. Toll similarly is making available geothermal heating and cooling systems in projects such as the Hills at Southpoint in Durham, N.C. KB Home is installing solar panels as a standard feature in several new projects. Pacific Housing is taking this a step further in a Sacramento project, installing a battery storage system as a backup to rooftop solar panels.

Surprisingly, these kinds of features are not significantly impacting housing affordability. Taking into consideration all rebates and tax credits available, construction costs in the Brookfield project are only increased by $1.50 per square foot on a net basis, allowing it to remain one of the most affordable new housing developments in San Diego County. This project also benefits from the moderate, coastal Southern California climate; such energy efficiency improvements would cost considerably more in the warmer inland climate zones.

In Phoenix and other markets, Meritage Homes has been able to include an array of energy-saving features, including solar energy, while keeping sales prices under $230,000 for a 3,000-squarefoot home, by incorporating these elements into their standard design rather than adding them as options. Moreover, as an optional upgrade, they are offering sufficient additional solar panels to eliminate electrical service costs.

As these kinds of offerings become more commonplace in the home building industry, the question will be how far such efficiency can be taken, particularly by production builders. The goal of many developers, consumers, and environmentalists is to be able to produce homes that are net zero with regard to resource impacts, i.e., homes with on-site features that reduce consumption to zero, through some combination of efficiency and renewable energy generation.

To achieve such net zero results with regard to energy will require taking significant additional steps in most cases. These might include thicker exterior walls, heat-resistant roof tiles, higherefficiency heating and cooling equipment, conditioned attic space, passive heating and ventilation features, fewer and better insulated windows, strategic orientation of the structure, and planting of deciduous trees. In all likelihood, it also will require installation of on-site energy generation facilities, particularly photovoltaic solar, geothermal, solar water heating, and/or wind turbines. This is all readily doable now, but at a cost of $40,000 to 50,000 for a typical new detached home.

Photo: Courtesy KB Homes KB Home is another builder installing solar panels as a standard feature in several of its new projects, including Newbury at the Enclave in Eastvale, Calif.

At the same time, an energy savings greater than that available from a full range of green building features can be obtained by simply locating homes in walkable communities or transit-oriented locations, as energy use and greenhouse gas emissions associated with vehicular transportation typically exceed those of the house itself. Such locational considerations will be increasing in significance in California, in particular, as the state implements not only the mandates of A.B. 32 but also other statutory requirements for reduction of vehiclerelated environmental impacts.

Bringing water consumption down to net zero is more challenging. Significant reductions can be achieved by using the lowest-flow fixtures indoors, planting the most drought-resistant landscaping, and using both collected stormwater and domestic gray water for irrigation. However, in the absence of onsite water treatment capability, net zero will not be achievable.

Individual zero-energy custom homes are popping up, especially in areas with temperate climates, and a handful of zero-energy subdivisions are being built. These homes typically also receive LEED certifications and come with a certain cachet of environmental consciousness.

It is reasonable to ask, however, whether achieving zero-energy status and near-zero water status is a particularly worthwhile goal.

Noted new urbanist architect Andres Duany has taken the lead in criticizing LEED and other similar programs for requiring large expenditures to meet extreme standards, when nearly the same level of environmental gain can be achieved at far less cost. Achieving that last increment comes with a highly disproportionate price tag. Just as a given level of energy reduction can be achieved through retrofitting older homes at one-eighth the cost of achieving the same reduction in already more-efficient new homes, the cost of taking a standard new home to a zero net energy level could instead pay for signifi- cant energy reductions in several new homes. Furthermore, new urban, infill, and transitoriented developments already substantially reduce their energy use footprint simply by virtue of their locations, and therefore should be viewed as effectively below net zero compared with new homes in locations that generate high vehicle miles traveled.

Zero net energy is a lofty goal, and its application to even a small percentage of new homes serves as a proving ground for new technologies and new design methods, some of which can be applied to production homes. It is not, however, a feasible or practical approach for all new housing. Nor should it be.

We can accomplish far more in the way of reducing our energy and water use by applying more cost-effective methods on a larger scale, to both new housing and the existing housing stock. This will take political courage, however, because new homes do not have a political constituency, while existing homes certainly do.

Until conservation and efficiency become real goals for the general public throughout the country, new housing alone will bear the financial burden, to the detriment of both housing affordability and environmental goals.

BB Steve Doyle is president of Brookfield Homes, San Diego. Cary Lowe is a San Diego land use lawyer and planning consultant.

http://www.bigbuilderonline.com/Industry-news.asp?articleID=1603853&cid=NWBD110712002

Green Housing Developer In Sacramento

Local green developer wants to change how people look at communities

By Sena Christian

Some good has come to town. Literally. LJ Urban, our friendly neighborhood green developers, recently began accepting contracts for its Good housing project in the Washington neighborhood of West Sacramento. This LEED-certified development located at Fourth and B streets, right across the river from downtown, will eventually contain 35 units when it’s completed by the end of next year. LJ Urban built the development around eco-friendly measures, but more so around people, which is why plans incorporate porches, a community garden and a park with a bike path weaving around the space.

“We don’t want to just build and sell houses. We want to change how people think about communities. We want to make cities better,” said Levi Benkert, co-founder of LJ Urban.

The project began three years ago, back when there was a trailer park on the site and green building had not quite hit the mainstream here in Sacramento. LJ Urban bought the trailers and relocated the handful of residents to apartments, then set to work researching the heck out of every possible option for the green houses, looking for the most reasonably priced sustainable choice.

Designed by Craig Stradley of local architecture firm Mogavero Notestine Associates, with interiors by Sacramento-based BlankBlank, the houses are prime examples of modern eco-urban living. The houses have dual-flush toilets and tankless water heaters to conserve water. Kitchens are equipped with Energy Star appliances and countertops made from recycled paper and resin. Concrete floors are made with fly ash (a byproduct of the coal-burning process). Recycled insulation made of used phone books and denim jeans keeps building shells efficient, and NightBreeze systems create natural ventilation and limit air-conditioning use. Reflecting aluminum roof sheathing frames the buildings, which helps prevent heat from penetrating through roofs and walls during the summer and escaping during winter.

The developers decided to leave three large oak trees, and although they had to remove several walnut and cedar trees, the wood was reclaimed and transformed into shelving and exterior window shades. A vegetable garden will be planted next to the oaks.

“We want community gardens all around,” Benkert said. “We love them.”

To keep the houses comparatively affordable (units range from $339,000 to $450,000), solar panels are optional, and LJ Urban will pay a substantial portion of the cost for those who choose this feature. Even without photovoltaics, LJ Urban estimates the monthly gas and electric bill will average $15.

Good isn’t claiming to be the greenest housing project in existence. It’s not entirely off-the-grid and biodegradable. But then again, that was never the point. Yes, sustainability means green products and design, but the concept also means creating a community where people want, and can afford, to stay over the long haul.

The company’s mantra is “Dream big, live small and do good,” and the folks at LJ Urban mean it. They partnered with a nonprofit in Burkina Faso—a West African nation, and one of the poorest in the world—and funded the organization to train 38 masons through the Good project.

Benkert and his wife, Jessie (LJ Urban co-founder) will relocate from their home in East Sacramento to Good in September, downsizing by 900 square feet, which they don’t see as a sacrifice. Because what they get instead is a bike path for their three kids to ride on and a park right across the street, and hopefully, a collection of friendly neighbors.

When the Benkerts moved here from San Francisco 10 years ago, they started up two coffee shops before establishing Asante Homes in a garage in West Sacramento. For several years, they were land developers, but frustration with all the crazy suburban sprawl in the area prompted them to become builders as well and rename themselves LJ Urban.

“Making [green] lifestyle changes are simply impossible in a suburban home,” Benkert said. Suburbs require new roads, new sewers and significantly more resources than infill, where developers can tap into infrastructure already there. LJ Urban currently has 11 projects in the works, all within a mile-and-a-half of the state Capitol building.

“Sacramento has an opportunity to be a leader in the sustainable-urban model,” Benkert said. “If you want a low-footprint lifestyle, you can really do it here.”

http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/good-to-go/content?oid=699132

Green Development In The 'Burbs

Remaking St. Charles in a shade of green
Developer to test suburban Md. market for energy efficiency

By Lisa Rein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 30, 2009

First came the "green" jobs, green buildings and green energy.

Now Southern Maryland will get a green city, where residents will live in energy-saving homes, shop in energy-saving stores and walk under energy-saving streetlights as a new plant next door generates carbon-friendly solar power.

This is the vision to revitalize St. Charles, a planned community of 12,000 homes and 5 million square feet of offices, stores and industrial parks in Waldorf now showing its age.

American Community Properties Trust, a developer, will announce plans Monday to double the community's size while reducing its carbon footprint through green design and, officials hope, technology that could create thousands of green jobs.

"What we're trying to do is reinvent the balance of the community," said Steve Griessel, the company's chief executive. "When the green thing first started, people said, 'We're going to put green icing on the cake.' We want to build the thing from the ground up as a green cake."

The first homes in St. Charles rose 40 years ago. It was to be the next Columbia, a planned community offering neighborhood schools, playgrounds, walking paths, lakes and a shopping center. Griessel said he hopes the new niche will revive a development that, despite Charles County's rapid growth, has become stagnant.

American Community Properties, Southern Maryland's biggest developer, has struggled with flat housing prices and losses that led to a corporate restructuring last year, and Griessel said he expects home prices in St. Charles -- now from $235,000 to $400,000 -- to remain depressed. By going green on such a large scale, "we want to put ourselves on the map," he said.

The question is whether a smaller carbon footprint will sell in a middle-class bedroom suburb 22 miles from Washington.

"This is not a handful of people in Takoma Park," said Malcolm D. Woolf, Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley's top energy adviser, referring to the Montgomery County neighborhood known for its progressive views. "It's a market test of the economic power of sustainability in a conservative part of Maryland, a mainstream community."

The state is offering no financial support to the developer, although O'Malley (D), who has made conservation a centerpiece of his energy policy, is scheduled to speak at the announcement Monday.

The green city would dovetail with another developer's plans to build a 10-megawatt solar facility in St. Charles. The $35 million plant on 75 acres would be built by Competitive Power Ventures, a Silver Spring company that also has proposed a natural gas plant on a neighboring site in St. Charles's industrial area. The company is trying to secure financing for both projects.

If all three projects come to fruition, the future for those living in St. Charles would look like this: low-flush, low-flow toilets and showers; better-than-normal insulation; recycled carpets; and government-certified, Energy Star-rated appliances. Energy-saving windows would also be in every home, alongside "smart" thermostats that allow the utility company to lower the air conditioning by a few degrees when energy demand is peaking and prices are highest, Griessel said.

And the homes, starting with a neighborhood scheduled to break ground in January, will bear the country's most recognized seal of approval for green buildings, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, stamp. Barrels will collect rainwater to irrigate yards and flush toilets. Over 10 years, the technology will result in lower heat and electricity bills in the 9,100-acre community, which has approval for 11,000 more homes, townhouses and apartments and 5 million square feet on 4,000 remaining acres, Griessel said.

Griessel said home prices will not rise to compensate for the cost of new technology; the developer is cutting costs on the front end. American Community Properties will harvest the soil and trees it removes from building lots before they are graded, selling them to recycling companies that will use them for erosion control and roadbeds in St. Charles and elsewhere.

New office and retail space will get the same treatment. And public spaces will enjoy their own sustainable features, with farmers markets, community gardens and streets lit by light-emitting diodes, a technology that's becoming the standard for green lighting.

The developer, working with the Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative, also plans to market energy-saving thermostats to owners of existing homes. It's a chance for the utility to target St. Charles for a series of conservation measures the state is requiring of all utilities, including audits and rebates on energy-saving appliances.

"We'll do a recruitment campaign in St. Charles, and the developer is helping to facilitate it," SMECO President Austin J. Slater Jr. said. If the Public Service Commission approves, the utility will test smart meters, which tell customers exactly when their rates are highest, in 1,000 new homes in St. Charles.

American Community Properties officials said they hope to create 20,000 green jobs for those building the new city. Workers could be trained through a program for the energy industry launched this year by the College of Southern Maryland.

"There's a lot of potential there," said the college's president, Bradley M. Gottfried.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/29/AR2009112902439.html

Green Home In Vermont

From The Times Argus (Montpelier, Vermont)


Article published Sep 27, 2009
Realizing the dream
Designing and building a green home in Vermont

As I began the process of designing and building a green home, I thought, "Building a green home just couldn't be all that difficult, right? Then how come no one around here seems to be doing it?"

To show local builders and homeowners just how accessible the process could be, I decided to use only locally available materials and skills. The project would meet both Energy Star and LEED criteria for maximum energy efficiency and minimal environmental impact. (The LEED — Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design — Green Building Rating System was developed by the U.S. Green Building Council as a way of encouraging sustainable building strategies.)

We had already framed up the house — the quickest part of the entire job. Next came the meticulous work of wrapping the exterior with extruded foam insulation, preparing the window openings, and taping and strapping the exterior. This created a waterproof, insulating layer under the siding known as the drainage plane, which keeps out any wind-driven rain that penetrates through the siding. This ensures dry siding on both sides, which means that it won't rot — and the paint lasts many years. The result is a low-maintenance and durable building skin.

Airtightness testing showed that all this work paid off handsomely. With help from Efficiency Vermont, we filled the house with theatrical smoke and then pressurized it with a big fan. Smoke was pushed out just a little at the windows and doors, but none escaped through the rest of the building envelope. The pressure meters confirmed that we had a very tight house. This feature, combined with high levels of insulation, sufficient south-facing windows and heat-recovery ventilation, gave a calculated heating requirement of one cord of wood per winter.

But this level of airtightness required careful design — and then rethinking on top of that.

When air is exhausted from a tight house (by a dryer or kitchen exhaust fan, for instance), the interior pressure drops. Outside air flows into this low pressure zone however it can. Without the usual cracks and air leaks, the outside air may flow down a chimney and bring toxic combustion gases with it.

For optimum energy efficiency, we wanted to keep the airtightness but solve the associated problems. First of all, we needed mechanical ventilation. Typically this is provided by a heat-recovery ventilator, which is simply a box with two fans — one blows stale air out and the other sucks fresh air into the house. The two airstreams pass by each other on opposite sides of a thin membrane so that the outgoing warm air can heat up the incoming cold air. The fresh air can then be ducted anywhere in the house.

Next we focused on the combustion appliances, which must be directly vented to the exterior for both intake and exhaust. Unlike most wood stoves, which draw their air from the room, the stove we were using had a fitting for an outside air duct to supply the firebox and ensure that the stove would always have a plentiful supply of combustion air drawn directly from outside. The gases in the chimney, stove and air inlet would be connected to the exterior only, so they wouldn't be affected by potential low pressure inside the house.

The dryer is usually double trouble. If it's electric, the fuel cost is high. But a gas dryer presents the combustion air problem. Either way, an air inlet is required to make up for the exhaust air. In winter, very cold air will be introduced this way. A solar (clothesline) or wood-fired (indoor rack) dryer is a simple, low-maintenance solution. The high-tech solution is a new condensing dryer, which does not exhaust but recirculates the air moving through it.

To conserve water, pumping energy and heating energy, we planned to install low-flow fixtures and a composting toilet. We fitted the sinks and showerheads with low-flow aerators. But the composting toilet was another cost casualty. The house was already connected to a state-permitted community leach field, and the extra cost wasn't justifiable. Instead we used dual-flush toilets that conserve water at both high and low flow rates. And we installed a solar water heater to provide hot water. Our plumber, Jay Smith, had just been certified by Renewable Energy Resource Center of Vermont (RERC-VT), so the hot water heater qualified for a nicely sized rebate.

We sought to minimize the building's electrical demand by making maximum use of daylight and using Energy star appliances, compact fluorescent and LED fixtures. Many of these fixtures qualify for rebates from Efficiency Vermont. The LED's are terrific: 60 watts of incandescent equivalent for 12 watts, a 5-to-1 savings!

Originally we had planned to install a rooftop photovoltaic system to meet the electrical requirements of the house. But in the end we were forced to eliminate the PV system because our budget didn't allow it. That may be just as well, because now the whole neighborhood is considering a shared community, net-metering PV system. Vermont's new net-metering legislation allows homeowners to build a renewable system and sell electricity back to the utility. This makes it possible, in the long term, to zero out your power bill.

Betti Jaquay, our painter, finished the interiors simply and cleanly. We avoided materials that would release toxic fumes (volatile organic compounds) and stuck with low-VOC paints and adhesives, or non-VOC materials like hardwood, linoleum floors and solid wood cabinets.

All the materials were purchased locally — including the solar equipment — and all the techniques were familiar to the builders. There is definitely a learning curve, but any contractor can build a house like this. Just get everybody on board at the start and follow these few simple rules for building a green house:

Buy local.

Think small.

Put it in the right spot.

Make it tight and insulate.

Use good quality, low energy materials.

Make it beautiful, adaptable and durable.

Michael Beattie, an architect, lives in Middletown Springs and be reached at mbeattie.arch@gmail.com. This article is the third in a series that covers the entire process of designing and constructing the green home. For Parts 1 and 2, see the articles on pages B4 and B2, respectively, of the June 14 and July 19 issues.

Visit the green home during an open house on Sunday, August 16, 1:00 till 4:00 p.m. Call 235-2468 or email mbeattie.arch@gmail.com for information and directions.

ON THE NET

Vermont Green Building Network

www.vgbn.org/

Renewable Energy Resource Center

www.rerc-vt.org/

http://www.timesargus.com/article/20090927/ENVIRONMENT/909279992/1033/ENVIRONMENT