End Use — Least Cost — Most Sustainable

Amory Lovins
All in all, a good time was had by all at RMI’s 25 anniversary. I wonder if they served Bananas Foster?

As previously noted, buildings play a key role in how Climate Change could be mitigated. Authors of the WBDG (Whole Building Design Guide) note:

On an annual basis, buildings in the United States consume 42% of America’s energy and 68% of its electricity. Furthermore, buildings generate 35% of the carbon dioxide (the primary greenhouse gas associated with climate change), 49% of the sulfur dioxide, and 25% of the nitrogen oxides found in the air.

Currently, the vast majority of this energy is produced from nonrenewable, fossil fuel resources. With America’s supply of fossil fuel dwindling, concerns for energy supply security increasing (both for general supply and specific needs of facilities), and the impact of greenhouse gases on world climate rising, it is essential to find ways to reduce load, increase efficiency, and utilize renewable fuel resources.

WBDG recommendations include:

  • Use passive solar design; orient, size, and specify windows; and locate landscape elements with solar geometry and building load requirements in mind.
  • Use high-performance building envelopes; select walls, roofs, and other assemblies based on long-term, insulation, and durability requirements.
  • Evaluate the use of common, on-site renewable energy technologies such as daylighting, solar water heating, and geothermal heat pumps.

Efficiency and conservation are often a sound investment economically and environmentally. Amory Lovins is proud of his banana farm in Snowmass, Colorado, a.k.a., the Rocky Mountain Institute, that employs super insulation. He also likes to ask about “end uses” and how much energy, of what kind, at what scale, from what source, will meet each usage in the cheapest way?

Lovins has been making his “negawatts” pitch for 35 years; someone may hear him eventually. In a recent WorldChanging story, Bill Joy notes “The demand side of energy efficiency is not as sexy as solar or wind energy, but it is much more effective.”

The WC story highlighted three areas that merit further R&D:

  1. Super-efficient energy storage
  2. Solar energy with non-exotic materials
  3. Combustion-less coal-to-energy production.

The first two relate directly to more energy efficient building and the third indirectly relates since building use so much energy.

Beyond, an end use — least cost analysis, there is another question: how sustainable is the choice of energy? Energy awareness extends beyond design elements and materials used in construction; energy awareness could mean the assessment of greenhouse gas emissions based on a life cycle assessment.

For instance, in the transportation sector, Dan Kammen has suggested a measure of the GHG equivalent for every mega joule expended. Other academicians have proposed intervention strategies that encompass sustainable architecture standards.

Other Possibly Related AG Posts Automatically Generated

2 Comments

  1. jcwinnie
    Posted 2007-8-16 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    According to an ECN article, efficiency of construction appeals greatly to Apple Inc. co-founder and legendary hacker Steve Wozniak.

    I have always admired getting the same results with fewer parts or procedures. That’s a win for everyone. I used that concept in my design approach in life. I was determined to give my highest regard to engineers and in engineering we always strive for more efficiency, defined mathematically as more out for less in. If you can build a car at the same price, with the same features (size and performance) yet it uses less gasoline or pollutes less, that’s a win for everyone, including the car manufacturer. Engineering leads to such advances, even when they seem like tiny steps.

    Now, let’s get to your point of energy efficient homes (or other facilities). I see two main parts to this issue. The first is using techniques to build homes with the least energy usage (and the least pollution). For example, ram-dirt is a material made of the dirt dug under where your home will be. It uses less energy than any other building material form to create, with a machine right at the construction site. Saving energy is good also in the sense that the energy to make this material usually comes from burning coal and emitting pollutants into our air. When properly applied, this form of construction is very low cost but applicable to luxury homes. I have spoken to builders who build luxury homes out of this material and have friends who are starting a company to manufacture blocks of this material for delivery to the site when the ram-dirt method cannot be used due to soil properties. This material is manufactured with grooved shapes and nails are not used in the construction. A home made of this should last 500 years, not just 75 years.

    The other form of energy efficiency in homes is in how much energy your home uses to operate. We emit more pollutants such as carbon dioxide in our homes than in our cars. That includes the coal burned to provide our electricity, but there are other reasons that homes are responsible for such emissions. If you can build a home, with the same effort and cost, that uses less electricity, it’s a win for everyone and any engineer can gloat.

  2. jcwinnie
    Posted 2007-10-27 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    According to his article in Business Week, past RMI employee Auden Schendler cautions companies against exclusively pursuing “Green Lies”, i.e., projects with quick payoffs.

    The idea that green is fun, it’s easy, and it’s profitable is dangerous. This is hard work. It’s messy. It’s not always profitable. And companies have to get off the mark and start actually doing stuff.

8 Trackbacks

  1. [...] can stop making pollution by “negawatts“, or make very little pollution by switching to renewable energy resources, e.g., geothermal, [...]

  2. [...] believe that Amory Lovins and others might disagree, instead arguing that money talks, and more and more investors see the future failure of fossil [...]

  3. [...] course, while improving efficiency is quite logical and profitable, the logic also would dictate that, if more GHG emissions come from the energy use during [...]

  4. [...] off, this blog agrees with Amory Lovins that “it is cheaper to save energy than to buy it.” And, it doesn’t [...]

  5. By Building Insulation For Roofs on 2008-1-31 at 1:18 am

    Roof Insulation…

    I…

  6. [...] while since this blog has said anything about passive solar, especially in combination with “super insulating“, so now is a good time to relay information about an E-co-lab “Passiv Haus” [...]

  7. [...] a page from the Amory Lovins playbook. Chief scientist at the Rocky Mountain Institute, Lovins is noted for applying the rubric: End Use — Least Cost — Most [...]

  8. [...] be relatively cheap to implement. Chief scientist at the
    Rocky Mountain Institute, Amory Lovins, who is noted for applying
    the rubric: End Use — Least Cost — Most Sustainable, also has
    observed that “it is [...]

Bad Behavior has blocked 2398 access attempts in the last 7 days.