david posada, <br><br>well said- and preach on! I agree that all of the approaches need to be embraced- anyone who says that one solution is the only solution should hang up their tool belt. <br><br>And - yes we should embrace a multiplicity of solutions toward a common goal. My comments were meant to help to define the goal (Saving our lifestyle- or saving the conditions on the planet necessary for our SURVIVAL as a species) These two goals are OFTEN at odds- hence the schism here. . <br>
<br>My only point in being somewhat acerbic but with tongue in my cheek was that I do see that right now there is a lot of confusion as to whether we are saving our lifestyles or saving our species. <br><br>And we should all encourage healthy debate- i agree with you wholeheartedly that as ambassadors we need to embrace all approaches that are directed toward the goal (once clarified) . There needs to be a multiplicity of approaches. There needs to be a lively debate amongst ourselves.<br>
<br>SO I apologize if my comments were too divisive- it's hard to glean nuance in a format like e-mail.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 10:16 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:greenbuilding-request@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-request@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">Send Greenbuilding mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:greenbuilding-request@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-request@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:greenbuilding-owner@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-owner@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Greenbuilding digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to to the Passive<br>
House Standard (David Posada)<br>
2. That Natural Feeling (Frank Cetera)<br>
3. new stove (Sacie Lambertson)<br>
4. Re: new stove (Reuben Deumling)<br>
5. Re: new stove (Sacie Lambertson)<br>
6. Re: new stove (Corwyn)<br>
7. Re: new stove (Clarke Olsen)<br>
8. Re: That Natural Feeling (Gennaro Brooks-Church)<br>
9. Re: That Natural Feeling (Gennaro Brooks-Church)<br>
10. Re: Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to to the Passive<br>
House Standard (JOHN SALMEN)<br>
11. Re: Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to thePassive House<br>
Standard (George J. Nesbitt)<br>
12. Re: new stove (Frank Tettemer)<br>
13. Re: Aggressively Passive: Building Homes tothePassive House<br>
Standard (Bob Waldrop)<br>
14. Re: That Natural Feeling (JOHN SALMEN)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 20:42:31 +0000<br>
From: David Posada <<a href="mailto:DavidP@gbdarchitects.com">DavidP@gbdarchitects.com</a>><br>
To: "'<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>'"<br>
<<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to<br>
to the Passive House Standard<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:21C7D52B2DD2E54992990F3E8D0E2C458B575C@email.gbdarchitects.com">21C7D52B2DD2E54992990F3E8D0E2C458B575C@email.gbdarchitects.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
There was a long and lively discussion recently on the PHNW group list about how the PHPP spreadsheet treats on-site PV vs on-site Solar Hot Water, the rationale behind the PE factor of 0.7, and an analogy of grid-tied PV generation can sometimes be more of a "carbon offset:"<br>
<br>
<a href="http://groups.google.com/group/PassiveHouseNW/browse_thread/thread/4e76b643b2310a6b#" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/group/PassiveHouseNW/browse_thread/thread/4e76b643b2310a6b#</a><br>
<br>
On a less technical note, when you hear glowing praise for PH from some corners, frustration and discontent from others, I'm reminded of the maxim "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail," and the inherent compromises of any tool.<br>
<br>
Some standards and rating systems are rather blunt tools, others far more precise. It seems the more precise and accommodating a tools is, the more difficult it can be for lay-people to learn and apply.<br>
<br>
For an engineer with many tools in their kit, and the wisdom to know the limitations and best practices for each one, they can make good calls on when one approach makes the most sense, and when it is requiring less meaningful effort.<br>
<br>
For others, the nuances may be less clear or important, and they see a particular tool such as Passive House as being for them the most appropriate means to an end.<br>
<br>
Part of the challenge is with so many tools vying for our attention, support, and dollars, their developers, promoters, reviewers and critics have to make countless assumptions and compromises both to make the tools useable and to explain them to the world. With the shifting fortunes of praise and popularity is easy to see how a lot of money, respect, and pride is at stake. I think it can be especially frustrating for people who have dedicated years to advancing better understanding of building systems to see the public's eyes glaze over and reach for the latest shrink-wrapped package.<br>
<br>
These comments from a new member may seem obvious or off-topic, but I felt compelled to offer them out of my own disappointment in watching how the conversation sometimes goes downhill when the value/ relevance/ worthiness of PH or LEED are being debated in different forums. We all love a good discussion and learn a lot from the debating the details, but I think something can get lost in the fray.<br>
<br>
I don't think this is a problem in this group, or limited to just the PH topic - people are exceptionally good here at clarifying their assumptions, finding common ground, and not taking blustery conclusions personally.<br>
<br>
When we venture outside of this circle as advocates and ambassadors for green building, I just wanted to make one proposal: I think we can be more effective at promoting a more responsible built environment if we acknowledge the common purpose of different tools, the inherent compromises of any approach, and how the balance of these strengths and weakness work for different contexts. Apologies if this sounds too idealistic or preachy.<br>
<br>
David Posada<br>
Portland, Oregon<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 16:11:19 -0500<br>
From: Frank Cetera <<a href="mailto:alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com">alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
Subject: [Greenbuilding] That Natural Feeling<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<AANLkTi=VDG_3f01uX0+GNLiP41OJBbBUDAbdT3M=<a href="mailto:q4DP@mail.gmail.com">q4DP@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
AC - loving your sentiments, no doubt cause they somewhat echo mine. But<br>
getting folks in the green building arena in my town to think natural is a<br>
big goal. Making the connection to the Earth through natural materials, and<br>
not highly processed and manufactured from states away; having "openings" in<br>
the shell that make that connection to the natural environment; not worrying<br>
down to the smallest BTU if the energy saved in high-tech manufacture bests<br>
the energy lost in natural low/appropriate techniques when making decisions;<br>
using natural materials and eleme4nts instead of mimicking them with<br>
produced structures - a sliding metal wall with openings in it meant to<br>
create a flickering light inside the home that is reminiscent of leaves on a<br>
tree when you could just plant or save the tree.<br>
<br>
Ahhh, to not be "locked" away in my home, as I often feel locked away from<br>
the outside in my office or other public buildings that fight their hardest<br>
to keep all the elements out!<br>
<br>
~Frank Cetera<br>
<a href="http://www.alchemicalnursery.org" target="_blank">www.alchemicalnursery.org</a><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Message: 2<br>
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:47:47 -0500<br>
> From: action jackson <<a href="mailto:benigncraft@gmail.com">benigncraft@gmail.com</a>><br>
> To: <a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Greenbuilding Digest, Vol 5, Issue 9<br>
> Message-ID:<br>
> <AANLkTiksPEgr+-tT5+=<a href="mailto:k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com">k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
><br>
> hey folks -<br>
><br>
> fer my two cents on passivehaus:<br>
><br>
> AWESOME! now people can build homes to an inappropriate scale and have<br>
> little human physical connection to the outside environment. THAT will put<br>
> us more in touch with needs of the planet- surely!<br>
><br>
> look- I think we all need to be honest about the conversation we are having<br>
> here- if it is about SURVIVING on the planet - humans have done quite well<br>
> (in some of the most inhospitable places on the planet i might add) and not<br>
> only survived but CULTURALLY THRIVED there- using small scale -low tech<br>
> shelters of local natural materials to take temporary refuge from the<br>
> outdoors- where they LIVED.<br>
><br>
> if the conversation is about maintaining our lifestyles- then start the<br>
> number crunching- decouple yourself from the planet that sustains you<br>
> (because that knowledge will serve us well when we colonize mars) - and<br>
> rock<br>
> and roll !<br>
><br>
> I prefer the planet we have -<br>
><br>
> but I respect the solutions in either conversation- I just think we need<br>
> to<br>
> delineate clearly.<br>
><br>
> to borrow an adage from the foodies (who i think parallel us in many ways)-<br>
> stands to reason- food /clothing /shelter<br>
><br>
> *Eat food*. *Mostly plants*. Not too much.<br>
><br>
> Build shelter.Mostly natural.Not too big.<br>
><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/d49fcec6/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/d49fcec6/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:40:34 -0600<br>
From: Sacie Lambertson <<a href="mailto:sacie.lambertson@gmail.com">sacie.lambertson@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Greenbuilding <<a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: [Greenbuilding] new stove<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<AANLkTimJS8B6WuF=<a href="mailto:VpCw0Qtui328O4-hpC%2BAMaFC5GAb@mail.gmail.com">VpCw0Qtui328O4-hpC+AMaFC5GAb@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
All, re the recent conversations about heating with wood, I ran across this<br>
interesting good looking new stove:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://3rings.designerpages.com/2011/01/05/bullerjan-canadian-lumberjack-designed-stove/" target="_blank">http://3rings.designerpages.com/2011/01/05/bullerjan-canadian-lumberjack-designed-stove/</a><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/733f4b07/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/733f4b07/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:45:41 -0800<br>
From: Reuben Deumling <<a href="mailto:9watts@gmail.com">9watts@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Green Building <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] new stove<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:AANLkTinnJ8GmZq-nhwNeRdEr1FP7ohn1Zp1Du0JK%2Bs_F@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTinnJ8GmZq-nhwNeRdEr1FP7ohn1Zp1Du0JK+s_F@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
Interesting. One would like to see some figures. It looks, well, different.<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Sacie Lambertson <<br>
<a href="mailto:sacie.lambertson@gmail.com">sacie.lambertson@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> All, re the recent conversations about heating with wood, I ran across this<br>
> interesting good looking new stove:<br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/a5e7b82f/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/a5e7b82f/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 5<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:59:33 -0600<br>
From: Sacie Lambertson <<a href="mailto:sacie.lambertson@gmail.com">sacie.lambertson@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Green Building <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] new stove<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<AANLkTi=<a href="mailto:xgMepmMnRf-b8OCota9LFGu2i3TAku2B-d-Kn@mail.gmail.com">xgMepmMnRf-b8OCota9LFGu2i3TAku2B-d-Kn@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
One of the iterations has what looks like ceramic inserts around the sides,<br>
which means it might hold and radiate heat, which for me is the secret of a<br>
good stove. Sacie<br>
<br>
*On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Reuben Deumling <<a href="mailto:9watts@gmail.com">9watts@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
*<br>
><br>
> *Interesting. One would like to see some figures. It looks, well,<br>
> different.*<br>
> *<br>
><br>
> *<br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/8f209aa6/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/8f209aa6/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 6<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:16:04 -0500<br>
From: Corwyn <<a href="mailto:corwyn@midcoast.com">corwyn@midcoast.com</a>><br>
To: Green Building <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] new stove<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:4D2B8524.2030105@midcoast.com">4D2B8524.2030105@midcoast.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed<br>
<br>
On 1/10/2011 4:59 PM, Sacie Lambertson wrote:<br>
> One of the iterations has what looks like ceramic inserts around the<br>
> sides, which means it might hold and radiate heat, which for me is the<br>
> secret of a good stove. Sacie<br>
<br>
On the other hand the 'exhaust tubes' look like they are designed to<br>
lose as much heat to the room as possible.<br>
<br>
I would like to see a bigger door, something to catch the inevitable<br>
ashes and coals coming out of the stove.<br>
<br>
Thank You Kindly,<br>
<br>
Corwyn<br>
<br>
--<br>
Topher Belknap<br>
Green Fret Consulting<br>
Kermit didn't know the half of it...<br>
<a href="http://www.greenfret.com/" target="_blank">http://www.greenfret.com/</a><br>
<a href="mailto:topher@greenfret.com">topher@greenfret.com</a><br>
(207) 882-7652<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 7<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:47:34 -0500<br>
From: Clarke Olsen <<a href="mailto:colsen@fairpoint.net">colsen@fairpoint.net</a>><br>
To: Green Building <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] new stove<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:8057ABF0-1E61-4EA3-B91E-99210661DEC7@fairpoint.net">8057ABF0-1E61-4EA3-B91E-99210661DEC7@fairpoint.net</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed";<br>
DelSp="yes"<br>
<br>
Efficiency cannot be achieved without separating heat extraction<br>
from combustion. I once had a fireplace grate<br>
consisting of similar steel tubes curving around the fire. A small<br>
fan would blow air through them: turning it on<br>
would suck so much heat out of the fire as to almost put it out!<br>
Later, I built a wood furnace with a water jacket<br>
in the firebox: it was a magnificent creosote condenser. Introducing<br>
a baffle isolating the firebox was the<br>
needed improvement.<br>
<br>
Clarke Olsen<br>
373 route 203<br>
Spencertown, NY 12165<br>
USA<br>
518-392-4640<br>
<a href="mailto:colsen@fairpoint.net">colsen@fairpoint.net</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Jan 10, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Sacie Lambertson wrote:<br>
<br>
> All, re the recent conversations about heating with wood, I ran<br>
> across this interesting good looking new stove:<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://3rings.designerpages.com/2011/01/05/bullerjan-canadian-" target="_blank">http://3rings.designerpages.com/2011/01/05/bullerjan-canadian-</a><br>
> lumberjack-designed-stove/<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
> <a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
><br>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
> <a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/</a><br>
> <a href="http://greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/2ab7f499/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/2ab7f499/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 8<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:30:14 -0500<br>
From: Gennaro Brooks-Church <<a href="mailto:info@ecobrooklyn.com">info@ecobrooklyn.com</a>><br>
To: Green Building <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] That Natural Feeling<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<AANLkTik5z+Lmcp2GSVgTFU7vx-u3-GNcO5P3Jbfq_+=<a href="mailto:m@mail.gmail.com">m@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1<br>
<br>
This list, like most of the world, is roughly separated along two<br>
lines, those forward looking techies who value science and those<br>
backward looking naturalists who value tradition.<br>
In one camp you have the number crunching BTU types and in the other<br>
camp you have the adobe plaster types.<br>
I lean on the naturalist side. I figure if it worked for 2000 years<br>
for a civilization then it is worth looking into. I am suspect of the<br>
techies who use wunder science to try to support an unsupportable<br>
lifestyle. For example, if every person on the planet built along PH<br>
standards we would die off immediately. PH standards are for rich<br>
Western construction and relies heavily on cheap materials from poor<br>
underdeveloped countries, who by the way consume a LOT less energy per<br>
household per year than PH requirements.<br>
<br>
However, if every rich Western country built along PH standards we<br>
would be WAY ahead of the game and it would be a HUGE improvement over<br>
our current wasteful building. But it doesn't solve the issue for the<br>
rest of the "developing world" (in parenthesis since that term implies<br>
they are less evolved than us superior and more developed countries -<br>
irony).<br>
<br>
So for me the solution is to use PH for the time being as an<br>
improvement to current western building. Just like LEED is an<br>
improvement in some areas. But neither are valid long term solutions.<br>
<br>
In answer to Corwyn, my personal metric is the self invented Zero<br>
Brownstone Technique, which could be tweaked to any area but in my<br>
case is very specific to North Western townhouse construction. There<br>
is more on my site but is basically is zero waster during<br>
deconstruction, zero new materials during construction, and zero<br>
energy use in the final home. It is our goal. Right now the "right<br>
amount" of insulation based on this metric for a brownstone is about 6<br>
inches of polyiso, which by the way is a little more than what our PH<br>
building calls for that we are doing. That was a nice confirmation<br>
that my "hunch" was on the right track of the one of the best metrics<br>
out there right now.<br>
<br>
<br>
Gennaro Brooks-Church<br>
<br>
Cell: 1 347 244 3016 USA<br>
<a href="http://www.EcoBrooklyn.com" target="_blank">www.EcoBrooklyn.com</a><br>
22 2nd St; Brooklyn, NY 11231<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Frank Cetera<br>
<<a href="mailto:alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com">alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> AC - loving your sentiments, no doubt cause they somewhat echo mine.? But<br>
> getting folks in the green building arena in my town to think natural is a<br>
> big goal.? Making the connection to the Earth through natural materials, and<br>
> not highly processed and manufactured from states away; having "openings" in<br>
> the shell that make that connection to the natural environment; not worrying<br>
> down to the smallest BTU if the energy saved in high-tech manufacture bests<br>
> the energy lost in natural low/appropriate techniques when making decisions;<br>
> using natural materials and eleme4nts instead of mimicking them with<br>
> produced structures - a sliding metal wall with openings in it meant to<br>
> create a flickering light inside the home that is reminiscent of leaves on a<br>
> tree when you could just plant or save the tree.<br>
><br>
> Ahhh, to not be "locked" away in my home, as I often feel locked away from<br>
> the outside in my office or other public buildings that fight their hardest<br>
> to keep all the elements out!<br>
><br>
> ~Frank Cetera<br>
> <a href="http://www.alchemicalnursery.org" target="_blank">www.alchemicalnursery.org</a><br>
><br>
>> ------------------------------<br>
>><br>
>> Message: 2<br>
>> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:47:47 -0500<br>
>> From: action jackson <<a href="mailto:benigncraft@gmail.com">benigncraft@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> To: <a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
>> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Greenbuilding Digest, Vol 5, Issue 9<br>
>> Message-ID:<br>
>> ? ? ? ?<AANLkTiksPEgr+-tT5+=<a href="mailto:k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com">k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
>><br>
>> hey folks -<br>
>><br>
>> fer my two cents on passivehaus:<br>
>><br>
>> AWESOME! now people can build homes to an inappropriate scale and have<br>
>> little human physical connection to the outside environment. THAT will put<br>
>> us more in touch with needs of the planet- surely!<br>
>><br>
>> look- I think we all need to be honest about the conversation we are<br>
>> having<br>
>> here- if it is about SURVIVING on the planet - humans have done quite well<br>
>> (in some of the most inhospitable places on the planet i might add) and<br>
>> not<br>
>> only survived but CULTURALLY THRIVED there- using small scale -low tech<br>
>> shelters of local natural materials to take temporary refuge from the<br>
>> outdoors- where they LIVED.<br>
>><br>
>> if the conversation is about maintaining our lifestyles- then start the<br>
>> number crunching- decouple yourself from the planet that sustains you<br>
>> (because that knowledge will serve us well when we colonize mars) - and<br>
>> rock<br>
>> and roll !<br>
>><br>
>> I prefer ?the planet we have -<br>
>><br>
>> ?but I respect the solutions in either conversation- I just think we need<br>
>> to<br>
>> delineate clearly.<br>
>><br>
>> to borrow an adage from the foodies (who i think parallel us in many<br>
>> ways)-<br>
>> stands to reason- food /clothing /shelter<br>
>><br>
>> *Eat food*. *Mostly plants*. Not too much.<br>
>><br>
>> Build shelter.Mostly natural.Not too big.<br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
> <a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
><br>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
> <a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 9<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:32:50 -0500<br>
From: Gennaro Brooks-Church <<a href="mailto:info@ecobrooklyn.com">info@ecobrooklyn.com</a>><br>
To: Green Building <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] That Natural Feeling<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<AANLkTi=-<a href="mailto:57hqo6Ekq89zyjxVB2JeRRe3oOZCMz90i%2BXH@mail.gmail.com">57hqo6Ekq89zyjxVB2JeRRe3oOZCMz90i+XH@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1<br>
<br>
correction: we build on the North Eastern US and not the North Western<br>
<br>
Gennaro Brooks-Church<br>
<br>
Cell: 1 347 244 3016 USA<br>
<a href="http://www.EcoBrooklyn.com" target="_blank">www.EcoBrooklyn.com</a><br>
22 2nd St; Brooklyn, NY 11231<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Gennaro Brooks-Church<br>
<<a href="mailto:info@ecobrooklyn.com">info@ecobrooklyn.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> This list, like most of the world, is roughly separated along two<br>
> lines, those forward looking techies who value science and those<br>
> backward looking naturalists who value tradition.<br>
> In one camp you have the number crunching BTU types and in the other<br>
> camp you have the adobe plaster types.<br>
> I lean on the naturalist side. I figure if it worked for 2000 years<br>
> for a civilization then it is worth looking into. I am suspect of the<br>
> techies who use wunder science to try to support an unsupportable<br>
> lifestyle. For example, if every person on the planet built along PH<br>
> standards we would die off immediately. PH standards are for rich<br>
> Western construction and relies heavily on cheap materials from poor<br>
> underdeveloped countries, who by the way consume a LOT less energy per<br>
> household per year than PH requirements.<br>
><br>
> However, if every rich Western country built along PH standards we<br>
> would be WAY ahead of the game and it would be a HUGE improvement over<br>
> our current wasteful building. But it doesn't solve the issue for the<br>
> rest of the "developing world" (in parenthesis since that term implies<br>
> they are less evolved than us superior and more developed countries -<br>
> irony).<br>
><br>
> So for me the solution is to use PH for the time being as an<br>
> improvement to current western building. Just like LEED is an<br>
> improvement in some areas. But neither are valid long term solutions.<br>
><br>
> In answer to Corwyn, my personal metric is the self invented Zero<br>
> Brownstone Technique, which could be tweaked to any area but in my<br>
> case is very specific to North Western townhouse construction. There<br>
> is more on my site but is basically is zero waster during<br>
> deconstruction, zero new materials during construction, and zero<br>
> energy use in the final home. It is our goal. Right now the "right<br>
> amount" of insulation based on this metric for a brownstone is about 6<br>
> inches of polyiso, which by the way is a little more than what our PH<br>
> building calls for that we are doing. That was a nice confirmation<br>
> that my "hunch" was on the right track of the one of the best metrics<br>
> out there right now.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Gennaro Brooks-Church<br>
><br>
> Cell: 1 347 244 3016 USA<br>
> <a href="http://www.EcoBrooklyn.com" target="_blank">www.EcoBrooklyn.com</a><br>
> 22 2nd St; Brooklyn, NY 11231<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Frank Cetera<br>
> <<a href="mailto:alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com">alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> AC - loving your sentiments, no doubt cause they somewhat echo mine.? But<br>
>> getting folks in the green building arena in my town to think natural is a<br>
>> big goal.? Making the connection to the Earth through natural materials, and<br>
>> not highly processed and manufactured from states away; having "openings" in<br>
>> the shell that make that connection to the natural environment; not worrying<br>
>> down to the smallest BTU if the energy saved in high-tech manufacture bests<br>
>> the energy lost in natural low/appropriate techniques when making decisions;<br>
>> using natural materials and eleme4nts instead of mimicking them with<br>
>> produced structures - a sliding metal wall with openings in it meant to<br>
>> create a flickering light inside the home that is reminiscent of leaves on a<br>
>> tree when you could just plant or save the tree.<br>
>><br>
>> Ahhh, to not be "locked" away in my home, as I often feel locked away from<br>
>> the outside in my office or other public buildings that fight their hardest<br>
>> to keep all the elements out!<br>
>><br>
>> ~Frank Cetera<br>
>> <a href="http://www.alchemicalnursery.org" target="_blank">www.alchemicalnursery.org</a><br>
>><br>
>>> ------------------------------<br>
>>><br>
>>> Message: 2<br>
>>> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:47:47 -0500<br>
>>> From: action jackson <<a href="mailto:benigncraft@gmail.com">benigncraft@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> To: <a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
>>> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Greenbuilding Digest, Vol 5, Issue 9<br>
>>> Message-ID:<br>
>>> ? ? ? ?<AANLkTiksPEgr+-tT5+=<a href="mailto:k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com">k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
>>><br>
>>> hey folks -<br>
>>><br>
>>> fer my two cents on passivehaus:<br>
>>><br>
>>> AWESOME! now people can build homes to an inappropriate scale and have<br>
>>> little human physical connection to the outside environment. THAT will put<br>
>>> us more in touch with needs of the planet- surely!<br>
>>><br>
>>> look- I think we all need to be honest about the conversation we are<br>
>>> having<br>
>>> here- if it is about SURVIVING on the planet - humans have done quite well<br>
>>> (in some of the most inhospitable places on the planet i might add) and<br>
>>> not<br>
>>> only survived but CULTURALLY THRIVED there- using small scale -low tech<br>
>>> shelters of local natural materials to take temporary refuge from the<br>
>>> outdoors- where they LIVED.<br>
>>><br>
>>> if the conversation is about maintaining our lifestyles- then start the<br>
>>> number crunching- decouple yourself from the planet that sustains you<br>
>>> (because that knowledge will serve us well when we colonize mars) - and<br>
>>> rock<br>
>>> and roll !<br>
>>><br>
>>> I prefer ?the planet we have -<br>
>>><br>
>>> ?but I respect the solutions in either conversation- I just think we need<br>
>>> to<br>
>>> delineate clearly.<br>
>>><br>
>>> to borrow an adage from the foodies (who i think parallel us in many<br>
>>> ways)-<br>
>>> stands to reason- food /clothing /shelter<br>
>>><br>
>>> *Eat food*. *Mostly plants*. Not too much.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Build shelter.Mostly natural.Not too big.<br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
>><br>
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 10<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:28:06 -0800<br>
From: "JOHN SALMEN" <<a href="mailto:terrain@shaw.ca">terrain@shaw.ca</a>><br>
To: "'Green Building'" <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to<br>
to the Passive House Standard<br>
Message-ID: <DA547CFA8BC747B9B5DDCD12583FD3B7@JOHN><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
Welcome to the list - great letter and thanks for the link to the PANW<br>
discussion - it was fun to read.<br>
<br>
As for being ambassadors for a better built environment I think one of the<br>
challenges with the 'toolbox' and accompanying vocabulary is that they can<br>
become prescriptive of what that built environment will be and houses people<br>
accordingly without really corresponding to actual use, social needs, or<br>
simply adapting. Like you say "...everything looks like a nail..."<br>
<br>
In medical terms this is called 'compliance' and is both a form of authority<br>
and management towards a desired medical outcome. Problems really only arise<br>
when the outcome does not match the need or diagnosis - or the prescribed<br>
need was part of the toolbox that did not match the patients actual needs.<br>
<br>
Compliance to a building code is similar in that it is recognition of<br>
certain community standards and a willingness to be part of our community.<br>
Codes change both in reaction to compliance and needs on the part of the<br>
community. Alternate 'codes' or methodologies (PA, NZE and predecessors) are<br>
part of that process of change but environmental and social planning are<br>
also a big part. As builders, designers, planners and community members we<br>
participate in all those aspects - so the tool box gets bigger if you are<br>
meeting the needs of the overall community.<br>
<br>
As an example the question of PV has been an interesting one for me as net<br>
metering and solar roofs have been discussed for a long long time and I<br>
participated in discussions on this with BC hydro 15 years ago. If a typical<br>
residential roof can generate 1/3rd more energy than the house consumes it<br>
seemed a 'no brainer' to utilize the footprint and grid connection of a<br>
residential roof.<br>
<br>
It was an appealing scenario but the main question then and now is 'who owns<br>
the roof'. Answering that question amounts to a paradigm shift of how we<br>
view housing and ownership - but realistically we have already experienced<br>
major shifts in how we use and 'own' homes that have yet to be designed for<br>
and provided for.<br>
<br>
On average we occupy a home for less than ? a day and most of that is spent<br>
sleeping (8.6 hrs on average). As a designer that tells me that a 'home' has<br>
to be ideally quickly responsive in terms of providing hvac and other<br>
necessities (hot water, aesthetics, views(?), daylighting(?). So however we<br>
fit individually into those averages our community as a whole does fit into<br>
that. Our community may occupy our home before and after us (we tend to move<br>
a lot as well) - so we are designing buildings that basically have to look<br>
after themselves for 1/2 the day without the benefit of our presence. Does<br>
PA, NZE provide for social occupancy or does it provide for the building in<br>
itself?<br>
<br>
A final comment is about scale. As a designer I've worked to minimize<br>
footprints and that is where a designer can excel in making a small space<br>
work. Ironically small homes as a single footprint are very wasteful of the<br>
materials, structure and systems needed to support them. Rowhouses,<br>
multistory strata and cohousing are much friendlier solutions.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
JOHN SALMEN ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN<br>
4465 UPHILL RD,. DUNCAN, B.C. CANADA, V9L 6M7<br>
PH 250 748 7672 FAX 250 748 7612 CELL 250 246 8541<br>
<a href="mailto:terrain@shaw.ca">terrain@shaw.ca</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>] On Behalf Of David<br>
Posada<br>
Sent: January 10, 2011 12:43 PM<br>
To: '<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>'<br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to to the<br>
Passive House Standard<br>
<br>
There was a long and lively discussion recently on the PHNW group list about<br>
how the PHPP spreadsheet treats on-site PV vs on-site Solar Hot Water, the<br>
rationale behind the PE factor of 0.7, and an analogy of grid-tied PV<br>
generation can sometimes be more of a "carbon offset:"<br>
<br>
<a href="http://groups.google.com/group/PassiveHouseNW/browse_thread/thread/4e76b643b" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/group/PassiveHouseNW/browse_thread/thread/4e76b643b</a><br>
2310a6b#<br>
<br>
On a less technical note, when you hear glowing praise for PH from some<br>
corners, frustration and discontent from others, I'm reminded of the maxim<br>
"if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail," and the<br>
inherent compromises of any tool.<br>
<br>
Some standards and rating systems are rather blunt tools, others far more<br>
precise. It seems the more precise and accommodating a tools is, the more<br>
difficult it can be for lay-people to learn and apply.<br>
<br>
For an engineer with many tools in their kit, and the wisdom to know the<br>
limitations and best practices for each one, they can make good calls on<br>
when one approach makes the most sense, and when it is requiring less<br>
meaningful effort.<br>
<br>
For others, the nuances may be less clear or important, and they see a<br>
particular tool such as Passive House as being for them the most appropriate<br>
means to an end.<br>
<br>
Part of the challenge is with so many tools vying for our attention,<br>
support, and dollars, their developers, promoters, reviewers and critics<br>
have to make countless assumptions and compromises both to make the tools<br>
useable and to explain them to the world. With the shifting fortunes of<br>
praise and popularity is easy to see how a lot of money, respect, and pride<br>
is at stake. I think it can be especially frustrating for people who have<br>
dedicated years to advancing better understanding of building systems to see<br>
the public's eyes glaze over and reach for the latest shrink-wrapped<br>
package.<br>
<br>
These comments from a new member may seem obvious or off-topic, but I felt<br>
compelled to offer them out of my own disappointment in watching how the<br>
conversation sometimes goes downhill when the value/ relevance/ worthiness<br>
of PH or LEED are being debated in different forums. We all love a good<br>
discussion and learn a lot from the debating the details, but I think<br>
something can get lost in the fray.<br>
<br>
I don't think this is a problem in this group, or limited to just the PH<br>
topic - people are exceptionally good here at clarifying their assumptions,<br>
finding common ground, and not taking blustery conclusions personally.<br>
<br>
When we venture outside of this circle as advocates and ambassadors for<br>
green building, I just wanted to make one proposal: I think we can be more<br>
effective at promoting a more responsible built environment if we<br>
acknowledge the common purpose of different tools, the inherent compromises<br>
of any approach, and how the balance of these strengths and weakness work<br>
for different contexts. Apologies if this sounds too idealistic or preachy.<br>
<br>
David Posada<br>
Portland, Oregon<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
<a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener%0Agylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener<br>
gylists.org</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 11<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:46:53 -0800<br>
From: "George J. Nesbitt" <<a href="mailto:george@houseisasystem.com">george@houseisasystem.com</a>><br>
To: Green Building <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to<br>
thePassive House Standard<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:4D2BC49D.2090503@houseisasystem.com">4D2BC49D.2090503@houseisasystem.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"<br>
<br>
Dear John,<br>
I have enjoyed your critiques of PH, your BS (that's Building<br>
Science) Insight articles, your posts here on this forum, as well as<br>
your presentations in SF (San Francisco) this past, oops, last year. I<br>
agree with much of what you have to say, and agree that some some<br>
changes could help make PH more assessable in NA (North America).<br>
I had dinner with Dr. Feist in December which was great and I had a<br>
chance to clarify a few issues.<br>
I was recently elected to the Board of PHCA (Passive House<br>
California) and have been a certified Passive House Consultant since<br>
June, and my invitation to you, and perhaps Joe too to come and talk to<br>
us on a 4th Sunday at Pyramid Brewery in Berkeley still stands. We could<br>
changes meeting dates too to accommodate you.<br>
You have pickup up and understood some of the details better than<br>
some who have been through the training. I have made some clarifications<br>
below as needed.<br>
<br>
On 1/10/2011 7:44 AM, John Straube wrote:<br>
> As you may know, there are 3 numerical requirements of PH, with a<br>
> bunch of recommendations that vary with whom you speak to (of which I<br>
> dont think any are required) and what day you speak to them.<br>
> 1. 120 kWh/m2/yr of source energy<br>
This is for your all of your energy at your building site. And using the<br>
U.S. DOE average for source energy conversions need to be entered<br>
replacing the E.U. #'s. And the appropriate #'s for Canada should also<br>
be used.<br>
> 2. 15 kWh/m2/yr of annual space heating demand<br>
and 15 kWh/m2/yr for space cooling, this and heating are based on site<br>
energy use (as opposed to source energy)<br>
> 3. 0.6 ACH@50 air tightness<br>
This is a multipoint pressure & depressurization test, and must pass<br>
both, equivalent to our ASTM-E779<br>
> and you should have a mechanical ventilation system.<br>
Correct, and wrongly assumed to have to be a balanced HRV or ERV, it can<br>
be exhaust or supply only. If you install a balanced system you can't<br>
have more than a 1Pa delta between rooms (this is a requirement per Dr.<br>
Feist)<br>
<br>
To be Certified, you have to submit plans, pictures & other<br>
documentation showing your project was built as it was modeled in the<br>
PHPP. You have to test the mechanical system and have it balanced to +/-10%<br>
<br>
A note on square meters, the EU m2 TFA (treated floor area) is a net<br>
usable square footage, it does not include stairs, and is only a % of<br>
other spaces. We typically use a gross exterior floor area, so without<br>
making an an adjustment to the floor areas the #'s can be off (I made<br>
this mistake 3 years ago, before I knew better).<br>
> You have to meet 120 kWh/m2/yr site energy regardless of PV.<br>
Correct, end of sentence<br>
> Sort of. In fact, the PHPP spreadsheet uses a factor of 0.7 to when<br>
> calculating the factor for PV: I assume this means in an all electric<br>
> house you could use up to 120/0.7= 170 kWh/m2/yr.<br>
No, there is no adjustments to any of the numerical requirements for PV<br>
generate electricity. There has been discussion about a small house,<br>
cold climate, and retrofit modifications, but I am not clear on if they<br>
are official yet and the exact details.<br>
> I do not know why PV is rated this way, since in a grid<br>
> interconnected system like PV, the best factor one would think was<br>
> possible is 1.0. Anyway, the problem is that the PHPP software<br>
> basically ignores the PV generated electricity in its verification:<br>
> you can add PV but it does not reduce the energy accounted for in the<br>
> 120 number.<br>
><br>
> So yes, this limits the size of the PV array and would avoid very<br>
> large PV arrays on small houses. That is good. We can still have<br>
> largish PV arrays on large houses.<br>
> For a large house in Sonoma California, this results in an absurdly<br>
> bad house, even if it met the other two requirements of PH. A 300 m2<br>
> house (say 4500 sf) could use 300*120=36000 kWh. This is a large<br>
> amount of energy which could be provided by a 28 kW PV array, and<br>
> render the house net zero. This would meet PH's 120 requirement. But<br>
> it may not meet the 15 requirement for space heating and has nothing<br>
> to do with the airtightness. Meeting 15 is easily possible in Sonoma<br>
> (where heat pumps work very well). The only hard part is getting 0.6.<br>
> Of course, in Sonoma, 0.6 is a pretty stupid measure, since the<br>
> energy saved going from 1 to 0.6 is truly trivial. But if you want PH.<br>
My rough calculation based on actual output of PV in the SF Bay area<br>
would say it's an 18kW PV system to get to net zero source energy. Still<br>
honking large! Net Zero Site energy would be much smaller, and net zero<br>
Time Dependent Value (California's modified source energy) would be even<br>
smaller. Net Zero is not a trivial pursuit, especially in large house.<br>
><br>
> Sensible economics would reduce the size of PV arrays on most house,<br>
> eg if it is cheaper to save energy in a specific project than it is to<br>
> produce it, a sensible design would choose to save energy. This is one<br>
> of the requirements that the Building America research program tries<br>
> to convey: use the lowest cost means of saving energy, and every home<br>
> reaches a point where PV is more economical than, for example, adding<br>
> another 2" of foam to a 12" thick layer under your slab (to pick a<br>
> favourite example).<br>
><br>
> Now lets look at a small house in a cold climate like Minneapolis.<br>
> Say a 1500 sf house plus a basement, which would have a PH area of<br>
> maybe 130 m2. Thus we can only use 15600 kWh of energy of all types,<br>
> which would be 5770 kWh for an all electric house using the PHPP US<br>
> values. This would be hard to do all electric! Also total space<br>
> heating demand would be limited to 1950 kWh (=66 therms) regardless of<br>
> how this heating demand is met. This is really hard and kind of crazy<br>
> to achieve in a cold climate small house. Meeting this 15 number is<br>
> what drives many of the extreme and non-obvious decisions, not so much<br>
> the 120 number. At least this the case in cold climates and small houses.<br>
I think this is why they have considered a cold climate adjustment to<br>
the 15 kWh/m2/yr budget.<br>
><br>
> For example, I currently live in a medium size house (1500 sf raised<br>
> ranch with a fully finished basement) in a coldish climate (7500 HDD<br>
> F). I cannot meet the 15 kWh/m2 demand number for space heating,<br>
> although I could likely meet the 120 number, and could reduce the<br>
> blower door number from 1 ACH@50 to 0,6 ACH@50 by spending another<br>
> $5000 or so (I looked at this during the retrofi: the payback for this<br>
> option was in the order of 100 years, and it was 4 times cheaper to<br>
> use PV to generate the energy saved than saving it this way). But I<br>
> could not get certification if I wanted to because I dont meet the 15<br>
> number: I am over twice this with R45 walls, R80 ceiling, R30 basement<br>
> walls, triple glazed R6.5 windows, etc. There is zero benefit to me,<br>
> society or the environment, to meet that 15 target but it is required<br>
> for PH. For a townhouse in a 5000 HDD F climate in, say Frankfurt<br>
> Germany, 15 would be a nice guideline (oh, I guess that is where PH<br>
> was developed..) but it still would not matter to the goals of good<br>
> buildings like the 120 number does. Oh, and I heat primarily with wood<br>
> from my own property, so the fact that I use more energy for heating<br>
> is pretty irrelevant.<br>
My congratulations to you if you are under the 120 kWh/m2/yr total<br>
source energy budget (without PV) even if you don't meet the 15<br>
kWh/m2/yr heating budget.<br>
<br>
You have achieved an equivalent level of performance, an energy<br>
efficient house, and that's is what we all should be trying to achieve,<br>
no mater what we call it!<br>
><br>
> Just some more thoughts.<br>
><br>
> On 2011-01-09, at 9:08 PM, Rob Dickinson wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Interesting post, John.<br>
>><br>
>> I'm afraid I need clarification on a few points.<br>
>><br>
>> If I understand correctly, in PH you can't increase the amount of<br>
>> total kWHs available by adding a solar PV array beyond the energy<br>
>> allotment specified by 120kWh/m2/yr. To me, this makes some sense<br>
>> because it avoids the examples of very inefficient houses<br>
>> compensating by installing enormous solar PV arrays.<br>
>><br>
>> But if one had an all-electric house and the exact amount of<br>
>> electricity allowed by the area formula (i.e. 120 kWh/m2/yr) were<br>
>> produced on-site using PV, wouldn't that that be more of a 1:1 source<br>
>> energy/site energy, and allow the full 120kWh/m2/yr? That would<br>
>> seem sensible. Or is PH not that sensible?<br>
>><br>
>> Hopefully I have expressed my question clearly. I look forward to a<br>
>> response.<br>
>><br>
>> Rob<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 5:44 PM, John Straube <<a href="mailto:jfstraube@gmail.com">jfstraube@gmail.com</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jfstraube@gmail.com">jfstraube@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> "I still find each day too short for all the thoughts I want to<br>
>> think, all the walks I want to take, all the books I want to read,<br>
>> and all the friends I want to see." ? John Burroughs (1837-1921)<br>
>> American naturalist, writer<br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
>><br>
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
><br>
> Dr John Straube, P.Eng.<br>
> Associate Professor<br>
> University of Waterloo<br>
> Dept of Civil Eng. & School of Architecture<br>
> <a href="http://www.buildingscience.com" target="_blank">www.buildingscience.com</a> <<a href="http://www.buildingscience.com" target="_blank">http://www.buildingscience.com</a>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
> <a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
><br>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
> <a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/c1b94403/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110110/c1b94403/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 12<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:01:28 -0500<br>
From: Frank Tettemer <<a href="mailto:frank@livingsol.com">frank@livingsol.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] new stove<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:4D2BC808.2060301@livingsol.com">4D2BC808.2060301@livingsol.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed<br>
<br>
On Jan 10, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Sacie Lambertson wrote:<br>
<br>
All, re the recent conversations about heating with wood, I ran across<br>
this interesting good looking new stove:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://3rings.designerpages.com/2011/01/05/bullerjan-canadian-lumberjack-designed-stove/" target="_blank">http://3rings.designerpages.com/2011/01/05/bullerjan-canadian-lumberjack-designed-stove/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
This stove is basically a newer version of an older idea from the<br>
sixties and seventies, called a "Free Flow" . The tubes were intended<br>
to extract and distribute a large amount of heat from the firebox.<br>
Nearly all of the ones that I knew of have self destructed rather<br>
quickly, as the inner surface of each tube would get very hot, and<br>
expand, around the much cooler outer surfaces. The welds between each<br>
tube would be torn apart by disproportionate expanding and non-expanding<br>
metal. Any of the Free Flows used in this cold Ontario climate were<br>
compromised, in less than a decade of service.<br>
<br>
Also, as Corwyn has pointed out, the stove did infact extract a lot of<br>
heat, which caused the fire to cool too quickly, and as a result, the<br>
second half of the burn, of each loading of the stove, went down hill<br>
fast, and caused a lot of incomplete combustion, and subsequent creasote<br>
build up in the chimney.<br>
<br>
It is, though, at first glance, a very sexy looking device. Makes you<br>
really want to think it will succeed.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Frank Tettemer<br>
Living Sol ~ Building and Design<br>
<a href="http://www.livingsol.com" target="_blank">www.livingsol.com</a><br>
613 756 3884<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 13<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 21:12:40 -0600<br>
From: "Bob Waldrop" <<a href="mailto:bwaldrop@cox.net">bwaldrop@cox.net</a>><br>
To: "Green Building" <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Aggressively Passive: Building Homes<br>
tothePassive House Standard<br>
Message-ID: <AE996533B47D4D54A0225F132518FBB3@your5c6d22d993><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";<br>
reply-type=original<br>
<br>
OK, thanks for the clarification, it makes sense, now its more<br>
understandable. No thanks on the larger house, the one I have is plenty big<br>
for the five of us. Bigger houses mean bigger property taxes, and bigger<br>
energy bills, and MORE HOUSEKEEPING, as even if it were at the passive haus<br>
standard, we would have to pay for it, and my goal is to pay and use less,<br>
not more. Plus bigger houses hold more stuff and that is always a<br>
temptation.<br>
<br>
Sometimes I think we need a standard that no house can be called green if it<br>
is more than X sq ft/person typically habitating there. Not sure where that<br>
limit should be drawn, except to say that our house is plenty big for usn's,<br>
<br>
Bob Waldrop, OKC<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "John Straube" <<a href="mailto:jfstraube@gmail.com">jfstraube@gmail.com</a>><br>
> No, Bob, PH is both smarter and dumber than that.<br>
> The energy metric is based on source energy: that is energy that feeds an<br>
> electric plant, or the gas used to transport and compress natural gas.<br>
> So if you house was all electric, it would be limited to 42 kWh/m2/yr<br>
> because the electricity grid in Germany requires 2.7 units of energy for<br>
> every unit of electricity (this is 3.35 in the United States, but the<br>
> PHIUS uses the ratio for the German power grid: no I am not making this<br>
> up).<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 14<br>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 19:16:18 -0800<br>
From: "JOHN SALMEN" <<a href="mailto:terrain@shaw.ca">terrain@shaw.ca</a>><br>
To: "'Green Building'" <<a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] That Natural Feeling<br>
Message-ID: <B18DF77DD34642BC8FA393DB38EEED66@JOHN><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
When I started with this as a work endeavour the term was 'appropriate<br>
technology'. It bridged a lot of disciplines but was mostly fostered by<br>
planning departments academically in the 70's as a geosocial and somewhat<br>
anthropological planning tool for '3rd world' development. We did have an<br>
expression though that the '3rd world starts at home'. The environmental<br>
movement at that time was literally concerned with the environment and a<br>
growing awareness of environmental degradation - nuclear issues, etc. The<br>
initial split was practical and political practice and had some<br>
philosophical basis at the time (Frankfurt school, adorno, etc.)<br>
<br>
Prior to that the environmental movement was either very much a literary<br>
movement (aka Thoreau) or unfortunately a somewhat fascistic movement based<br>
on nationalist/racial sentiment of organic 'traditional' inspiration<br>
(jugenstil, etc.) I worry about the degree of attachment or fanaticism that<br>
any concept or work practice deserves or warrants.<br>
<br>
I mistrust tradition as much as I mistrust any sentiment that is not<br>
informed or can demonstrate some knowledge base. A 2000 year old herbal<br>
recipe is not a sentiment it is a recipe which means it contains information<br>
that has been conveyed for a period of time. I may not understand the recipe<br>
or lack the knowledge to make it - or it may have lost some crucial piece of<br>
information over time and/or we may have lost some knowledge as to how to<br>
make the recipe work - I think that is the crucial distinction (the<br>
knowledge of how to make information real). Creating or recreating that<br>
knowledge (putting information to use)is I feel the only real responsibility<br>
- but with that is the implied responsibility of not putting the community<br>
at risk.<br>
<br>
I still like the term 'appropriate technology' as it is either appropriate<br>
or not and forms part of our knowledge base. I use clay plasters and other<br>
materials that some might consider 'natural' as I think they are appropriate<br>
and need to be used - and I can do that within my community and code and<br>
forward that knowledge and experience a little bit. It doesn't make me a<br>
backward looking naturalist - but I do value the tradition of my community<br>
when it seems worth valuing.<br>
<br>
John<br>
<br>
<br>
JOHN SALMEN ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN<br>
4465 UPHILL RD,. DUNCAN, B.C. CANADA, V9L 6M7<br>
PH 250 748 7672 FAX 250 748 7612 CELL 250 246 8541<br>
<a href="mailto:terrain@shaw.ca">terrain@shaw.ca</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>] On Behalf Of Gennaro<br>
Brooks-Church<br>
Sent: January 10, 2011 3:30 PM<br>
To: Green Building<br>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] That Natural Feeling<br>
<br>
This list, like most of the world, is roughly separated along two<br>
lines, those forward looking techies who value science and those<br>
backward looking naturalists who value tradition.<br>
In one camp you have the number crunching BTU types and in the other<br>
camp you have the adobe plaster types.<br>
I lean on the naturalist side. I figure if it worked for 2000 years<br>
for a civilization then it is worth looking into. I am suspect of the<br>
techies who use wunder science to try to support an unsupportable<br>
lifestyle. For example, if every person on the planet built along PH<br>
standards we would die off immediately. PH standards are for rich<br>
Western construction and relies heavily on cheap materials from poor<br>
underdeveloped countries, who by the way consume a LOT less energy per<br>
household per year than PH requirements.<br>
<br>
However, if every rich Western country built along PH standards we<br>
would be WAY ahead of the game and it would be a HUGE improvement over<br>
our current wasteful building. But it doesn't solve the issue for the<br>
rest of the "developing world" (in parenthesis since that term implies<br>
they are less evolved than us superior and more developed countries -<br>
irony).<br>
<br>
So for me the solution is to use PH for the time being as an<br>
improvement to current western building. Just like LEED is an<br>
improvement in some areas. But neither are valid long term solutions.<br>
<br>
In answer to Corwyn, my personal metric is the self invented Zero<br>
Brownstone Technique, which could be tweaked to any area but in my<br>
case is very specific to North Western townhouse construction. There<br>
is more on my site but is basically is zero waster during<br>
deconstruction, zero new materials during construction, and zero<br>
energy use in the final home. It is our goal. Right now the "right<br>
amount" of insulation based on this metric for a brownstone is about 6<br>
inches of polyiso, which by the way is a little more than what our PH<br>
building calls for that we are doing. That was a nice confirmation<br>
that my "hunch" was on the right track of the one of the best metrics<br>
out there right now.<br>
<br>
<br>
Gennaro Brooks-Church<br>
<br>
Cell: 1 347 244 3016 USA<br>
<a href="http://www.EcoBrooklyn.com" target="_blank">www.EcoBrooklyn.com</a><br>
22 2nd St; Brooklyn, NY 11231<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Frank Cetera<br>
<<a href="mailto:alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com">alchemicalfranklen@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> AC - loving your sentiments, no doubt cause they somewhat echo mine.? But<br>
> getting folks in the green building arena in my town to think natural is a<br>
> big goal.? Making the connection to the Earth through natural materials,<br>
and<br>
> not highly processed and manufactured from states away; having "openings"<br>
in<br>
> the shell that make that connection to the natural environment; not<br>
worrying<br>
> down to the smallest BTU if the energy saved in high-tech manufacture<br>
bests<br>
> the energy lost in natural low/appropriate techniques when making<br>
decisions;<br>
> using natural materials and eleme4nts instead of mimicking them with<br>
> produced structures - a sliding metal wall with openings in it meant to<br>
> create a flickering light inside the home that is reminiscent of leaves on<br>
a<br>
> tree when you could just plant or save the tree.<br>
><br>
> Ahhh, to not be "locked" away in my home, as I often feel locked away from<br>
> the outside in my office or other public buildings that fight their<br>
hardest<br>
> to keep all the elements out!<br>
><br>
> ~Frank Cetera<br>
> <a href="http://www.alchemicalnursery.org" target="_blank">www.alchemicalnursery.org</a><br>
><br>
>> ------------------------------<br>
>><br>
>> Message: 2<br>
>> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:47:47 -0500<br>
>> From: action jackson <<a href="mailto:benigncraft@gmail.com">benigncraft@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> To: <a href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
>> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] Greenbuilding Digest, Vol 5, Issue 9<br>
>> Message-ID:<br>
>> ? ? ? ?<AANLkTiksPEgr+-tT5+=<a href="mailto:k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com">k3MqXMfbMzu8G3Zkg1rK9HbMP@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
>><br>
>> hey folks -<br>
>><br>
>> fer my two cents on passivehaus:<br>
>><br>
>> AWESOME! now people can build homes to an inappropriate scale and have<br>
>> little human physical connection to the outside environment. THAT will<br>
put<br>
>> us more in touch with needs of the planet- surely!<br>
>><br>
>> look- I think we all need to be honest about the conversation we are<br>
>> having<br>
>> here- if it is about SURVIVING on the planet - humans have done quite<br>
well<br>
>> (in some of the most inhospitable places on the planet i might add) and<br>
>> not<br>
>> only survived but CULTURALLY THRIVED there- using small scale -low tech<br>
>> shelters of local natural materials to take temporary refuge from the<br>
>> outdoors- where they LIVED.<br>
>><br>
>> if the conversation is about maintaining our lifestyles- then start the<br>
>> number crunching- decouple yourself from the planet that sustains you<br>
>> (because that knowledge will serve us well when we colonize mars) - and<br>
>> rock<br>
>> and roll !<br>
>><br>
>> I prefer ?the planet we have -<br>
>><br>
>> ?but I respect the solutions in either conversation- I just think we need<br>
>> to<br>
>> delineate clearly.<br>
>><br>
>> to borrow an adage from the foodies (who i think parallel us in many<br>
>> ways)-<br>
>> stands to reason- food /clothing /shelter<br>
>><br>
>> *Eat food*. *Mostly plants*. Not too much.<br>
>><br>
>> Build shelter.Mostly natural.Not too big.<br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
> <a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
><br>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
><br>
<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener%0Agylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener<br>
gylists.org</a><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
<a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener%0Agylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener<br>
gylists.org</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Greenbuilding mailing list<br>
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>
<a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>
<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br>
<br>
<br>
End of Greenbuilding Digest, Vol 5, Issue 12<br>
********************************************<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Cheers,<br>Joshua Thornton <br>Founder/Director <a href="http://naturalbuild.ca">naturalbuild.ca</a><br>519 387 8787<br><a href="mailto:info@naturalbuild.ca">info@naturalbuild.ca</a><br>
<div style="visibility: hidden; display: inline;" id="avg_ls_inline_popup"></div><style type="text/css">#avg_ls_inline_popup { position:absolute; z-index:9999; padding: 0px 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; width: 240px; overflow: hidden; word-wrap: break-word; color: black; font-size: 10px; text-align: left; line-height: 13px;}</style>