[Greenbuilding] Old buildings = better energy performance; why? NYT

Alan Abrams alan at abramsdesignbuild.com
Tue Nov 19 16:16:32 CST 2013


I took a post occupancy look at a 1925 bungalow that we gut renovated and
added a very small addition to a few years ago.  it was brick veneer--the
earliest example I'd ever seen--so it gave us the opportunity to insulate
the wall cavities, not to mention the roof.  New Carrier Infinity equipment
with Carrier ERV.

Even adding 15% to the original habitable area, we reduced natural gas
usage by 60%.  But the electrical usage spiked.  Some of it was due to
central air, replacing one or two window shakers, some due to a relatively
inefficient ERV--but the rest was groovy lighting, a second TV
installation, moving the old fridge to the basement for beer storage, etc.
 And I had forgotten until just this moment the outlet we installed by the
toilet for one of those sybaritic seats...

The conclusion is that heat energy is relatively easy to manage, but
cooling and electricity for amenities is a struggle.

see blog entry for 2-24-13 for more detail:
http://www.abramsdesignbuild.com/2013/02/?cat=7

AA


On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 3:22 PM, John Salmen <terrain at shaw.ca> wrote:

> There are definitely a lot of factors. In looking to improve the
> efficiency of a leaky local waldorf school I was surprised to find that it
> consumed less energy than any other school in the province (on a per
> capita). But then no computers.
>
>
>
> I’ve lived in a number of old uninsulated homes. An old NA woodframe
> building will have ¾” plaster on ½” plaster and horse hair mix on ½” wood
> lathing. The base for the lathing was often a full layer of 1x sheathing
> boards. Framing was typically a full 2” and a lot of it.  Layers of
> sheathing, siding built up interior and exterior mouldings and trim work
> add up substantially.  So overall wood layers could add up to 3-4”.
> Significant interior mass with the walls. Substantial overhangs, recessed
> (cutting wind surface) and smaller windows (generally utilizing storm
> windows).  Generally good siting and landscaping. Add 100 years worth of
> paint and caulking for air seal.
>
>
>
> Compare that to a leaky house poorly insulated with badly installed r20
> and double or triple the glazing and yes the old house could perform better.
>
>
>
> *From:* Greenbuilding [mailto:
> greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] *On Behalf Of *Reuben
> Deumling
> *Sent:* November-19-13 9:16 AM
> *To:* Greenbuilding
> *Subject:* [Greenbuilding] Old buildings = better energy performance;
> why? NYT
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> "older buildings of every stripe, even those dating to the early 1900s,
> performed better than most structures from recent decades. Green-building
> experts say it is likely because they have fewer windows and thicker walls,
> which provide better insulation. "
>
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/nyregion/wide-differences-found-in-large-buildings-power-use.html?_r=0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Greenbuilding mailing list
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org
>



-- 
Alan Abrams

*certified professional building designer, AIBD certified passive house
consultant, PHIUS*
*certified passive house builder, PHIUS*
Abrams Design Build LLC
*sustainable design for intentional living*
cell     202-437-8583
alan at abramsdesignbuild.com
www.abramsdesignbuild.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20131119/eddfbf97/attachment.html>


More information about the Greenbuilding mailing list