[Greenbuilding] Fwd: energy savings myths

[JOHN SALMEN]

An example for me is a school renovation I was working on plans for and was
wanting reduce to reduce energy consumption (first order condition). For
comparison I looked at other 'energy efficient' newer schools (better
insulated, hvac, lighting, etc.)  Ironically the school I was working
consumed less energy than any other school. It was a waldorf school which
does not use electronic media or computers as part of its curriculum.
Lighting levels were also more typically varied and lower. 

 

That accounted for the use of less energy on a per student and facility size
basis but the place could still definitely become more energy efficient in
its own right - even though it had achieved the erroneous status as the most
'energy efficient' school.

 

From: greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Reuben
Deumling
Sent: November-17-11 2:12 PM
To: Green Building
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Fwd: energy savings myths

 

 

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Gennaro Brooks-Church - Eco Brooklyn
<info at ecobrooklyn.com> wrote:

... I don't see how the two
terms are not interchangeable, meaning a house that uses less energy
is more energy efficient and a house that is energy efficient uses
less energy.


see my last post. Not interchangeable. 
Energy efficiency is a second order concept. 
Uses less energy is the first order condition we (ostensibly) are interested
in.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20111117/79524ea5/attachment.html>