Concept Models – State-of-the Art or Future State?

2012 Smart-for-Us Car

The automobile industry likes to premiere concept cars, prototypes of a future state.  Builders shows tend to premiere concept houses which are expressions of the state-of-the art of materials and technology.   Future concepts are left to the creative entrepreneur, to be reviewed in the pages of esoteric sustainability blogs.  Why the difference?

Tonight I had an inspiring conversation with an engineer who proposes the Occam’s razor of HVAC.  The best HVAC is none.  This is the ultimate ‘passivhaus’ approach, only it isn’t passive at all.  That is to say, this rather radical concept would end up driving the design.   In an ironic twist, could one use the Revit MEP to design an HVAC with no mechanical components.   Can it depict air flow, heat gain, thermal mass absorption – without linking it to an object?  Probably not, since the geometry is entire artifact driven.   Clearly our technology is married to the concept of HVAC being mechanical. 

AEI Engineers - Designing Sustainability Solutions

The same question could be asked of any of the other eco-system value streams.  How could one design a future-state concept of a closed water systems, to include capture, use and re-use, and redistribution. This one appears simpler, since water has a physical form which must be contained.  But there are nebulous aspects of water which are harder to model, such as a harvest from mist  - used now in remote mountain regions, but applicable to any area which has regular morning fog.   Or the capture of the water when it leaves the human systems, and enters back into the eco-system.   As climate change the nature of rainfall, should we be considering wetland effluence surrounding our properties to recharge the water tables?

Water wall - balancing the ions for happy diners

But even more challenging is the conceptualization of combinations of these value streams. Take our water example. The story can be interlaced with a component of heat, which might be a source of energy.  This can be not only in the more commonly recognized form of geothermal heat, but also in the residual heat when water is flushed into the sewer.  This heat has, and can be capture.  Water can also serve as an air cooling agent on an outdoor deck, or a filter for dust particles.  It can provide extra humidity to the air, or can be extracted from overly humid air.  Water can provide an aesthetic value, or a harmonious sound or white-noise. 

All of this is very complex, and such a concept house would be expensive to build.  Yet, it is the exercise of working through such designs that opens the dialogue for working through the issues.  This is the first step towards these innovations becoming reality.  And so I tip my hat to our engineer friend, who has taken the time to design a “daylighting- centric” house,  a concept that draws on centuries of experience to help create a sustainable future  state for mankind.

Light Bulbs: Life Cycle Assessment

Assessing products is complicated.  A complete life cycle story starts with the extraction of the materials, the manufacture, the distribution and then the disposal.  We look at all of the environmental impacts, on air, water, soils, human health.  This sum total is divided by the service life of the product.  Clearly, a long life is better – as the “harm” per year is lower.

In the case of products like light bulbs, the energy consumed is also part of the equation. Not only the actual quantity of the energy consumed, but the source and distribution.  So there is really no way to have a definitive life cycle analysis for any particular bulb,  but we can deal in generalities.   Since 48% of the electricity generated in the US is from coal-fired plants, then we need to include the methyl mercury, the most toxic form of mercury, released into the atmosphere and absorbed into the bloodstream through our lungs.   If we were assessing lightbulbs in Iceland, where the energy is from geothermal, then this equation shifts dramatically.

Tradeoffs between materials hazards and pollution from energy are a reality of modern life.  The only non-toxic source of light is the sun.  

Last year, there was a study by UC Irvine’s Department of Population Health & Disease Prevention, which warned us to be vigilant about the toxicity hazards of those marketed as replacements for lighting products that do not deplete energy resources or contribute to global warming.   That point was well taken, but the research created a toxicity scare which was not in keeping with the actual research.  For example, the testing was done on LED bulbs which had been pulverized for the mineral leach test.  Not likely this will ever happen in real life.  Yes, there are rare earth metals, such as copper – which is used in pennies, copper wiring and piping. The devices studied were raw T1-3/4 LEDs, which does not have the same device architecture as lighting class LEDs, resulting in a much higher lead-content testing.   So while the news hysteria was overblown,  it is also incorrect to state that LEDs are non-toxic .  They should be recycled with toxic materials.

Fortunately, our government laboratories have been hard at work in studying the life-cycle assessment of LED lighting products, and just issued the final report last month.    The 78 pages are packed with solid facts concerning the manufacturing, the environmental impacts, pollution costs of energy sources and software comparison packages.  The data is based not only on current state of the art, but projecting out the current technology advances of LEDs into 2017.  The radial diagram says it all (above).    The point of comparison is a standard incandescent bulb, the blue line at the outside of the spider diagram.  CFLs and current LEDs are both much better, but relatively close to each other.   However, the real point news is the purple line, which is the LED 2017, which is where these bulbs are heading.   The controversial  ‘lightbulb’ bill HR2417 is calling for a reduction of energy in light bulbs of 70% by 2020.  According to this data, the LED 2012 is already at 76% energy savings, while the LED 2017 is projected to save up to 88%.

It is complicated and it has been a wildly unregulated market. Some of the products coming out of China were far underperforming the potential.   So I am glad the DOE has taken a stance, and is recommending actively working with manufacturers to meet the targets for efficacy and performance, and support the US industry establishing an ICC standard for manufacturing QC accountability.

Now -  I should go to bed and turn off all these toxic lights, since the sun went down hours ago…

‘No light’ Options for a Dark Sky

I miss the West – the open skies where you can gaze at the stars…. or is that only in the old cowboy movies.   In truth, when I first moved to my little college town in Virginia, I was more than a bit afraid of the night. It was so very dark.  The neighborhood I lived in had no street lights, and very few house lights.  Only then did I realize how much city lighting there was in my previous ‘Western’ city environment.

Light pollution is an increasing problem in the world. Leading the fight to preserve the night sky is the International Dark-Sky Association.  A quick look at a world chart of artificial night sky clearly shows the urban environments.   As one New Yorker put it: “I’ve seen the Milky Way in NYC only twice – when we had black-outs.”    Most of us have lost our connection with the skies;  we can’t even find the basic constellations.   It is harder to remember that we are just part of a greater universe when you can’t even see the other stars.    (look up the clear sky chart in your area)http://cleardarksky.com/csk/index.html - 

But this is more than a matter of cultural sentimentality.  PBS New hour had a very interesting report on light pollution Where Have All the Stars Gone? , and will be doing a television broadcast premier (July 5) of  “The City Dark,” an award winning documentary on light pollution.  There are several issues related to humans: health, safety and the protection of rights, as well as an escalating impact on wildlife.  

The universal human impact is that of disturbing sleep patterns.  Circadian rhythms can adjust to varying durations of daylight, but are also dependent on full darkness at night.  Increased light pollution calls for black-out curtains, and sun alarm clocks can help adjust for the extended day through artificial lighting (skip the radio part of the  clock, unless you can plug it into a pre-recording of birds chirping in the morning.  Who really needs to listen to traffic the very first thing in the morning..).

There are different types of light pollution problems.  Glare refers to the power density and direction from streetlights, and has been linked to traffic accidents.  And the very direction and casting of the light can be considered trespass.  Much as it would be unreasonable for one property owner to put trash on a neighbor’s yard, inflict upon them unwanted fumes or smoke, or barrage them with noise – so too would it be reasonable to expect a person to keep their light restricted to their property boundaries.  USGBC has addressed this in LEED SS Credit 8, which calls for an 80% reduction of lighting power densities, and limitation of lumens above  90 degrees (ie horizontal) to no more than 10% for the highest user of major city centers.   

A major source of lighting pollution comes from street lights.  In my old neighborhood, there is currently a debate about the addition of decorative light fixtures.   Most of the old fashioned light globes fall into the worse than very bad category, providing lighting just about everywhere except the sidewalk.  However, it would seem that one could find (or make) a clip on shield to fit over the lightbulb, much like a small lampcover.  This would fit right inside the glass bulb.   Not too expensive, and an immediate fix.

each spot represents a bird

There is a broader concern about light pollution which concerns wildlife.  Night-migrating birds, who typically fly at altitudes over 500 feet, often descend to lower altitudes during inclement weather.  It seems they are attracted to light sources, especially when the light refracting on humid air, or fog creates a halo effect.  It’s like a landing beacon for a plane.  The problem is, they get “caught” in this cone of light, and circle around, unable to break out of it, until they die from exhaustion or collision.  Some places have become sensitive to this issues,  such as the upbeam at the  9/11 Memorial in Lights, where they  turn the lights off at intervals when large numbers of birds are spotted in the beams.  The birds then disperse and regain their migratory path.   These are readily implemented, short-term ‘fixes,’  which simply require awareness and a change of behavior.

I love sunshine, I love light.  But I am also coming to terms with darkness, and welcoming the absolute contrast of it.  Who knows, maybe tonight I’ll go out on the deck and study the stars.

More ‘light’ ideas

The ultimate alternative to lightbulbs is daylight, and pacing our lives closer to the available light.  Earlier to bed, earlier to rise.  I know this wouldn’t be practical for many reasons,  but it does have its merit.   The great quandary when designing with natural light is the heat gain.  So here are a few interesting solutions.

Shade the windows.  This is such a simple concept, and yet had unlimited design potential.  I am contemplating replacing my old canvas shades, which made the interior of the house very dark and gloomy.  There are options of Solarshade Fabric, which cuts out 80% of the heat, but lets in the light. Or if I want to keep more of an awning,  Airolite  offers a wide variety of extruded aluminum sun controls. These have the advantage of being light-weight, and allowing air to flow through.  Not only does this let the heat escape, but it also makes them more resilient to strong windstorm.

Skylights have seen several technological advances recently.   To combat the heat loss through the glass, aerogel can be sandwiched in between the layers of glass, polycarbonate, or acrylic to get up to an R20 for a 2.5 inch thick layer.  While that is not as much as a roof insulation, it does match the minimum standards of walls.   Aerogel has several other impressive properties – it is UV stable, reduces sound transmission, and is incredibly strong – virtually eliminating the risks of skylight breakage.   It is still new enough to be expensive, but the technology has gone through the initial entrepreneurial change of hands, and glazing has been manufactured and installed recently on pilot projects in New York.

A new addition to the scene is the Suntracker lights, which capture and enhance the light hitting the skylight dome with an array of mirrors. Using a mini, fully-autonomous sun tracking motor, the dome is especially adept at catching early morning and afternoon sun, while deflecting the daytime heat.   With a growing number of installations under their belt, (Office Depot in Austin, TX)this seems to be a pretty reliable option.

Then there is great design and innovation.  A Danish architect, Bjarke Ingels, completely redefines the relationship of form and function.  In the design of a city hall tower, Bjarke  had designed a “democratic periscope.”  This is a looming open tower which is cited over the council chambers.  Councilmembers can look up, and see in the angled reflections in the rooftop, the city “they are messing with.”  Likewise, in the warp-speed TED Talk which is well worth viewing,  Bjarke describes how the citizenry can use this two way mirror to see what the chamber is doing, or to send angry protests.  It “combines political overview with public insight. A realization of radical architectural transparency.” 

Yes indeed, let there be light.  

Shedding some Logic on Lightbulbs

From 'the future is green' Barry Katz

In 2007, light bulb energy efficiency standards ( HR 2417) were enacted with bipartisan support and signed into law by President Bush.  Twice since then, the House of Representatives has voted down bills to repeal this act. Two-thirds of Americans support the lighting standard (61% call it a good law), and five-sixths (84%) are satisfied or very satisfied with the alternative bulbs, according to a USA Today/Gallup poll (February 2011).  So why is this again being debated, with the public, aka their representatives, wanting to repeal  a bill which a) saves energy and utility costs for people and b) is being endorsed by industry?

The key opposition is premised on false propaganda that the HR2417 bans incandescent light bulbs. That is simply incorrect.  It calls for a reduction of energy of 27% by 2014, and 70% less by 2020 – whatever the bulb type.  Manufacturers have responded by developing new energy-saving choices and they oppose the repeal of the bill.  To repeal the bid would be essentially doing a bait and switch on their business models, only it is a club and switch.  First you tell them to develop better bulbs, and that there will be a market – based on the new standard.  So if you then take away that standard, they may lose the increased volume from market transformation, which in turn would allow them to manufacture these bulbs in larger quantities, at lower costs, recoup their R&D, and have incentive to keep making better bulbs.

There is the argument that manufacturers want a piece of this lucrative market, since the cheap incandescents are now made in China.  But business in the US means jobs.  That's good!  Or do we listen to the nay-sayers: "We demand our freedom!"-  to buy lightbulbs made in China? 

Incandescent, CFL, or LED?  Which is which?

As for the arguments about this bankrupting the homeowner…. When was the last time you heard of a homeowner changing out ALL the lightbulbs in their house at the same time?   In real numbers, we’re talking about $1.50 for a halogen incandescent, which meets the 25-30% energy reduction needed by 2014. And to meet the 75% for 2020, you can buy a $2.00 CFL .  LEDs are coming down in price, and they can last up to 22 years.   So really?  All this fuss over another 50 cents a bulb?   As for those bulbs which are up at the top of a cathedral ceiling – the ones for which you practically need a cherry-picker in your living room in order to reach them -  my guess is that you would be GLAD to have a bulb which will last for 22 yrs and not emit heat (ie reduce your fire hazard).  And for new homes?   The cost of the lightbulbs is truly not the biggest factor in the overall cost of the home.

Some of the more salient arguments would have to do with Kelvin, lumens, and heat output. However, those are all being addressed by the manufacturers, and  - oh yea -  the manufacturers aren’t fighting this bill.  If you want a bulb that puts out light like Edison’s and yet is far more energy efficient, you can get one.

So enough, already.  This is our opportunity to save money in our own utility bills, do the public a service by installing these efficient bulbs in houses, and help improve the environment.  That would be the environment on which WE depend in order to live and breathe. This bill can eliminate the need for about 30 large power plants, and reduce domestic carbon pollution to the equivalent of removing 17 million cars from the road each year.

Get your facts from www.lumennow.org,   check out the tips and webinars at the Alliance to Save Energy today, and -  download the Lighbulb Finder Ap

Taking Control of Your Destiny

Amid all the recent political bally-hooing in the US about the onerous nature of government, I was reminded of all the opportunities we actually have in the US and Canada to determine our own destiny.     Individuals, industry and government are interdependent, and any one of the three can catalyze a change in the other two.

Re-usable packaging

Take packaging, for example.   Some states and local jurisdictions decided that the federal government was not doing enough to support environmentally acceptable packaging, so they adopted their own laws and regulations.  For example, Maine has a law which prohibits the sale of packaging with heavy metals, such as lead, mercury, cadmium and hexavalent chromium.  They have also introduced a policy of ‘extended producer responsibility,’  common in Europe and Canada, to require producers to finance or manage collection and recycling.  This was a bi-partisan initiative, where business, environmental groups and legislators all worked together.   Amazing, but there you have it.

Coca-Cola new Recyclable Bottle

How has industry responded?   Coca-Cola has set up  a hole subsidiary devoted to its goal of recycling 100 % of its cans and bottles in North America by 2015!!  And 50% around the world.  They have seven factories working on recycling, and an active research department experimenting with nonpetroleum-based packaging materials.   Starbucks has set up a closed loop system in which the cups gathered at the stores, trucked up to Green Bay, and recycled into paper napkins which it uses in the stores.  And - it makes business sense -  it lowers operating costs, builds brand reputation (no small thing in todays over-abundant materialistic world) with minimal advertising.

High Efficiency Furnace

Energy efficiency is another area which has shown great collaboration and great results.  We are all aware that the voice of the people, collectively, resulted in energy initiatives in cities like Austin and Portland, through green building programs like EarthAdvantage, and programs like Architecture 2030.   But there is another story, where HVAC manufacturers got together in 2009 to create a consensus on creating equipment and efficiency solutions that reached beyond federal standards, and created solutions which vary by climate.  In 2011, these were adopted by the DOE as the new elevated minimum standards.   ACCA contends that this represented a minority of stakeholders, and that it went too far.  It is interesting that many of the comments on the ACCA blog are about “Big Brother” going too far.  Yet I repeat – this originated from industry – NOT from government.   Yes, there will be a heavy price to pay to retrofit old home with new  ventilation requirements, but really – if we are upgrading the building envelope with insulation and air tightening – isn’t this a natural outcome?  And the sooner that new construction starts building to these requirements, the easier it will be for future HVAC replacement.   It has to start somewhere,  and with rising fuel costs, the higher cost will be repaid in lower utility bills.

My point is this.  We all have opportunities to control our destiny.   Manufacturers can work together to improve the product,  industries can get together to set new minimum standards, builders can initiate green building programs, and individuals can influence politics.   There are many fine examples of areas in the US which are excelling in energy efficient construction  -  Vermont, Wisconsin, Oregon, California  -  and areas of Canada which continually push the bar – like Ontario.   These are areas who have come together collectively to make this world a better place, to reduce the environmental footprint, and to transition to a more prosperous, sustainable economy.   Forget the politics – just do it.