I guess it means the hidden 'dark energy' missing from our consumption accounts is flowing *through* our buildings, just not contained *in* the materials of buildings... What'll boost the built environments' fraction back up some will be to include the cost of the contractor's laborer's daughter's wedding, the doorman's cleaning bill, the boss's golden parachute and the bank's take, and stuff like that... Some of that, though not all, is influenced by design of simplicity and truth, but not all of course.
You could say the shift to real numbers is away from materials and more toward process.
Barry,
That's exactly my assumption, that the USGBC and the people at the EIA providing the Energy Star data they're probably using, are making a good faith effort to count everything they can. They're just not counting the energy costs they don't have documentation for. A 'margin of error' is a very common thing in making any kind of measurement. They should at the very least have a note about that.
Their figure is 48% of US energy use. That's off by a factor of 28 because of the conceptual error in the estimate. How would you raise that with them? I've tried, but maybe not the right way with the right person.
The problem here is that they represent their statistic as the energy impact of building and running buildings. They ignore the energy cost of the people who build and run the building. That is presumably because it's a conceptual misunderstanding that purchasing services does not consume energy, and because when you give people money you have no way of knowing what they'll consume with it.
If your thinking about how to improve the accuracy of the measure, just start by assume all spending has average energy consumption. That's the now ~6000btu/$. Leaving that out is like having a bathroom scale that reads only half your weight... nice, but it does not give you accurate guidance.
The Brookhaven update on PV impacts is certainly thorough, for the materials and process of manufacture... but doesn't that omit majority of the product's real life cycle impacts? What happens if you follow everything the money buys, not just the materials?
220V vs 110V: I can't remember the exact physics of it. Yes, Volts x Amperes = Watts, but when we are looking at efficiency, what matters is the way that resistance and impedence works in the transmission. I think the loss is a factor of the current (Amps) rather than the Voltage. For this reason distribution is generally at 4,000V (proportionally reducing the current), because there is less loss, and then it is stepped down to 110/220V at local transformers. Thus I'd suggest that 220V is more efficient than 110V. In fact I'd state that 220V is more efficient than 110V.
There's also the DC vs AC debate. DC suffers less loss, hence the proposals for super-high voltage global DC networks to spread the renewably harvested geothermal/wave/hydro/wind/solar to local rectifiers (to turn it into AC)/transformers (to step it down to a usable voltage).
Well, I hope so, Philarch. But are they going to keep it up? Or are they going to close the dam up in 3 days and forget about it? We've done so much damage at this point, where do we start?
"National park officials said that 10 years of research at a cost of $80 million had shown that the flooding as planned could irreparably harm the national park's ecology and resources"
I don't know enough about this to make an intelligent comment, but personally it is both impressive and appalling that they spent $80mil and ten years for theoretical implications on the man-made flood. Impressive because they got the resources to spend that much on such research when no one else seems to care or have resources to do that kind of research. Appalling because they did it regardless of what the report said anyway and it seems completely disproportional to the amount spent on building/doing something in the first place. I mean if it is appropriate to spend $80mil on something like that, wouldn't it be appropriate to spend far more on researching implications of all the other things we build, destroy & alter?
Well, as sometimes necessary, I need to make a correction. I said somewhere above that the USGBC figure of ~40% of US energy use for buildings was greatly overstated, more on the order of 1.7%. There may still be an error in the 40% ball park figure, but I tried today, and can't confirm*either* my calculation or theirs (arg...) The common reference appears to be the same data set too, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo05/ What'll be needed is carefully comb through the definitions of the measures to see exactly what's being counted, and if any reasonable estimate for the implied energy content of the untraceable spending is included.... Now, maybe next I'll see an error in my theory that adding to things makes them larger! That would be a stupendous relief. ;-)
phil, if you simply look around and guestimate what isn't consumed by buildings, those items falls into either transportation, agriculture, industry, and some other stuff. we spend way more time inside, using buildings, using stuff in buildings, and living inside. so 40% seems reasonable and maybe low. While some folks eat outside, most cooking and consuming of stuff is inside, so where do you draw the line between production and consumption?????
Ah yes.... That's exactly the rub! 40% sounds reasonable, for the share of the nation's business involved in making and using buildings. What that thought process assumes is included, and what people actually measure for building energy impacts, are entirely different though...! What ASHRAE, LEED, Energy Star and life-cycle analysis (LCA), as well as architects and individuals, *all* count as their energy use is their 'receipts' for energy expenditures. The true total energy use involved with buildings may is 10 times that. Can you guess what a discrepancy between global totals and what's locally accountable might be due to...?
If there's energy use we can't directly count for might we carry an estimate for it as an 'uncertainty' or a 'contingency' or 'implied' in our impact tabulations? The problem, I think, is everyone is considering just what they see as their little part, so our accounting is not inclusive. To help us make choices, what we want to get to is the whole impact of our *choices*. We seem to be getting, though, is just the impacts of what's *easily accounted*, and because that's a small part of the total explains a lot about why sustainability is having so little effect.
Holy Moly - Hertz now has a Green Collection for car rentals. You can choose from a Ford Fusion, Toyota Carrolla, Camry and Prius. I am such a happy girl.
So....more badddd news, It's amazing how it accumulates when all you want is for it to all go away. I watched a wonderful webcast, and you can look in tomorrow, all day, catching day 2 of the National Academy of Sciences Energy summit. It's the best of the nation's best scientists and leading administration officials talking about where we are and where we go. http://www7.nationalacademies.org/energysummit/
Anyway, the scientists are all calling the incomprehensibly difficult problems that the mounting evidence presents "extremely challenging" and that "time is not our friend" because of "scope creep", though still failing to notice that learning curves that get ever steeper indicate you're actually working on completely the wrong problem... People are even beginning to wonder how we could have previously not noticed that using productive land to replace energy that formerly came from underground displaces entirely what the land was used for before, causing considerable disruptions already.
To a few it's becoming clearer now, it would be more feasible to figure out a way to stabilize the economies without harm than to stabilize their endless multiplying expansion without harm. No one is yet willing to broach the subject in actual public discussion though. Hell, I may even have to go back to work, having misjudged the climate myself!!
So, it occurred to me to calculate the equivalent number of bags of charcoal we each of us dump out on our sidewalks each month, along with that of all our neighbors, for nature to clean up, corresponding to the fuels used to deliver our goods and services. It's a nice round number, ~100 bags 20lb each, for every family or individual making $50k, each month. The schemes are grand, but the most optimistic scenario even with consistent heroic efforts on everyone's part seems to be only to slow the growth of that to doubling by 2050.
must be a better problem to solve somewhere in that.... ;-)
Having only briefly perused the article, I wonder if this is mainly a result of or found in mostly tightly sealed buildings?
Or is it just the opposite. The more tightly sealed and effecient a buildings is the lower it's chances of molding..
That seems to be the crux of their arguement...More ventilation equals potentially more moisture?
ncarb is being rather hypocritical in attacking LEED, since they don't even address sustainability in the ARE's. Are they trying to educate folks or scare them???
any good energy management plan must be subservient to adequate moisture control - its not an either or situation, but a both and.
that the building ventilation flush out can introduce excessive moisture is a good point.
nam- their point is that a balance is needed between ventilation, tightness, and energy performance...
no, i'm not trying to inflate my post count, but this surfing session has uncovered lots of cool stuff...
[url=http://www.climatetechnology.gov/Marlay--PresentationToDCCEAS--23Feb2008.pdf]climate tech ppt[/ur] from the DC Council of Engineering and Architectural Societies Engineers Week Awards Banquet back in February, thanks to the EERE.
From that presentation, VT, CA & PA have the most policies and laws addressing carbon emissions and florida has the least!
I need some advice on solar pumps for a pool. Has anyone ever spec'd this before? Any knowledge of wind pumps...sounds funny - but I am assuming there is such a thing. Oh and affordable!
as you can guess I'm aiming as part of the green manifesto to make my home as eco-friendly as possible.
Hi Green TC -
Can someone give me some ideas of where I can go to find some Life Cycle Costs and Analyses for green initiatives? For whatever reason my computer is not linking to the site the USGBC has on their website. Thanks.
tuna- theGBI.org has some simple LCA spreadsheets templetes. haven't check out how easy they are to use, but they seem reasonable for standard construction methodologies and simple assemblies.
atechno- most pool supply places should have info on such devices, but I don't know any specific mfrs. happy splashing.
Two points for installing bike racks and changing rooms? TWO POINTS?????? WTF? Am I the only one who finds this revision for LEED 2009 utterly ridiculous?
I'll keep the explanation to a minimum and just ask if anybody is familiar with any resources re: heritage/preservation and energy issues. I have some decent (but not-so-in-depth) info but I could use more.
I'll be contributing to this thread a lot more now, too, 'cause....you guessed it, I'm working to 'greenify' heritage buildings this summer. Rock on.
Ok, tuna, I confess: I don't understand your indignation at all. Are you saying that it's stupid that they are getting 2 points instead of 1, or that they should get more? I think it's fairly reasonable actually. Your own office (my former office) acted like they were going to be bike friendly by putting a shower in the basement. Last time I checked there was no shower head in that "storage room". And nevermind that they didn't put any bike racks out at all. So 2 points makes sense to me I guess.
slantsix....hmmm. I don't have much to say re: preservation, but if you have specific questions about energy issues, I can try to help.
I don't know where the proper place to post something like this and I don't really fee like starting a new thread, but has anyone ever gone the way of using ladybugs, praying mantises or other natural predators in their yard? How well did it work? Did you have problems with them leaving or dying?
I've started a compost heap (this will be my third attempt, yielding successful results prior). However this will be my first since I left undergrad/grad school. I'm looking at building a 36"x 36" container our of re-used 1"x 3" to approx 6" depth. The ground layer will be existing soil routed, a layer of the volcano's finest, my organic refuse, then cedar chips. The latter I'm adding because it seems to be the material of choice for commercial composters.
thoughts? I could do with the criticism - its been a while sine I've gardened and fearful my green thumb has turned
tuna-
IPM, integrated pest management, is well established at the commercial/institutional scale landscapes, less so at the residential scale. the key is providing habitat for the predators, or they will find someplace else to call home. Mixed planting beds with lots of flowers favored by pollinators, a water source, shelter via a brush pile/untrampled zones are key, and food. Lots of gardening mags have had articles about using beneficial bugs.
they'll leave if you don't make them feel at home...
a-techno- the latest on compost theory is to mix everything up, so you don't have layers of stuff.... If you don't have local worms to add to the mix, you may want to import some (but be careful about introducing invasives to the island). My favorite composting amendment is coffee grounds - forget the ceder chips unless they're freeeeeeee. keeping the pile moist and well aerated are important for progress towards black garden gold. Don't add meat/fats/pet or people poo, but anything else organic is great (egg shells are great too). lots of composting wisdom on the web. the worst case scenario, it take 4+ months instead of just two months to compost.
thanks TK, you are always a wealth of information. And i appreciate you being able to take the time to respond, particularly with the new demands of fatherhood.
There is a house down the block from mine; "house for a woodworker" when there are just bags of the stuff each week. So i picked up a few. I also have access to a fair amount of coffee trash too. So I'll add that to the mix. I didn't know about the pet poo - my first attempt had quite a bit of that stuff - and was how we realised that the dogs were reaching up and eating the orchids. The more advice the merrier
Okay here's a question - GeoThermal installation vs. traditonal HVAC system. Are any of the links on USGBC under ENERGY better than others? Any other websites I can go to to figure this out, or is this something that an engineer would be able to answer. I know very little about this topic and was just asked by the PM for info. YIKES!!! Please help a girl out. Thanks in advance.
Oh and Treekiller you'd be proud - I followed much of your compost heap advice and i have a steaming pile waiting for the completion of my bin. I have recycled a gal. coffee tin to use to collect my daily coffee grinds as well as natural waste (egg shells included), to add to the brush that I clear when gardening. The bin is being made of re-used timbers from the house demo, including the nails. Pictures will follow.
But I need a little more help. On this rock we aren't as eco saavy as well, everywhere else so we still bag most things from the grocery. I have purchased three shopping bags (post-composite) and have left one in each car but I keep forgetting to take it out when i go shopping. Any hints to remind myself - save stapling it to my hip?
tk, amen to the coffee compost...it's like 90% of the way there already! my two neighbors and i have had a very big communal compost bin that has been in operation for a solid decade...the thing's damn prolific!
HA! It took me a while to get used to taking my bags in with me when I shop too Atechno, but eventually you'll get the hang of it. I still forget sometimes and when I do I just leave my groceries in some out of the way corner and run back to the car to get it. Also if you have a small load, try just taking it with you sans any bag and then fill the bag once you get back to the car.
Mfrech and TK - thanks for reminding me... I've been meaning to take a covered container with me to work to gather coffee grounds. I'll go do that now.
Green Thread Central
I guess it means the hidden 'dark energy' missing from our consumption accounts is flowing *through* our buildings, just not contained *in* the materials of buildings... What'll boost the built environments' fraction back up some will be to include the cost of the contractor's laborer's daughter's wedding, the doorman's cleaning bill, the boss's golden parachute and the bank's take, and stuff like that... Some of that, though not all, is influenced by design of simplicity and truth, but not all of course.
You could say the shift to real numbers is away from materials and more toward process.
Barry,
That's exactly my assumption, that the USGBC and the people at the EIA providing the Energy Star data they're probably using, are making a good faith effort to count everything they can. They're just not counting the energy costs they don't have documentation for. A 'margin of error' is a very common thing in making any kind of measurement. They should at the very least have a note about that.
Their figure is 48% of US energy use. That's off by a factor of 28 because of the conceptual error in the estimate. How would you raise that with them? I've tried, but maybe not the right way with the right person.
The problem here is that they represent their statistic as the energy impact of building and running buildings. They ignore the energy cost of the people who build and run the building. That is presumably because it's a conceptual misunderstanding that purchasing services does not consume energy, and because when you give people money you have no way of knowing what they'll consume with it.
If your thinking about how to improve the accuracy of the measure, just start by assume all spending has average energy consumption. That's the now ~6000btu/$. Leaving that out is like having a bathroom scale that reads only half your weight... nice, but it does not give you accurate guidance.
The Brookhaven update on PV impacts is certainly thorough, for the materials and process of manufacture... but doesn't that omit majority of the product's real life cycle impacts? What happens if you follow everything the money buys, not just the materials?
Would you then have real systems analysis?
I should check in here more often.
tk, thanks for the USGBC ashrae quote.
220V vs 110V: I can't remember the exact physics of it. Yes, Volts x Amperes = Watts, but when we are looking at efficiency, what matters is the way that resistance and impedence works in the transmission. I think the loss is a factor of the current (Amps) rather than the Voltage. For this reason distribution is generally at 4,000V (proportionally reducing the current), because there is less loss, and then it is stepped down to 110/220V at local transformers. Thus I'd suggest that 220V is more efficient than 110V. In fact I'd state that 220V is more efficient than 110V.
There's also the DC vs AC debate. DC suffers less loss, hence the proposals for super-high voltage global DC networks to spread the renewably harvested geothermal/wave/hydro/wind/solar to local rectifiers (to turn it into AC)/transformers (to step it down to a usable voltage).
So a manmade event to (possibly) partially make up for destroying an ecosystem in the past...
Will we see more of this in the future in other places?
Well, I hope so, Philarch. But are they going to keep it up? Or are they going to close the dam up in 3 days and forget about it? We've done so much damage at this point, where do we start?
By the way, I don't know if you guys heard this but, the Arctic ice cap could be gone by summer. :o/
has a critical report on the flooding.
The Bureau of Reclamation strikes again...
Thanks guys.
you mean 'strikes out again...'
"National park officials said that 10 years of research at a cost of $80 million had shown that the flooding as planned could irreparably harm the national park's ecology and resources"
I don't know enough about this to make an intelligent comment, but personally it is both impressive and appalling that they spent $80mil and ten years for theoretical implications on the man-made flood. Impressive because they got the resources to spend that much on such research when no one else seems to care or have resources to do that kind of research. Appalling because they did it regardless of what the report said anyway and it seems completely disproportional to the amount spent on building/doing something in the first place. I mean if it is appropriate to spend $80mil on something like that, wouldn't it be appropriate to spend far more on researching implications of all the other things we build, destroy & alter?
I sound naive don't I...
Well, as sometimes necessary, I need to make a correction. I said somewhere above that the USGBC figure of ~40% of US energy use for buildings was greatly overstated, more on the order of 1.7%. There may still be an error in the 40% ball park figure, but I tried today, and can't confirm*either* my calculation or theirs (arg...) The common reference appears to be the same data set too, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo05/ What'll be needed is carefully comb through the definitions of the measures to see exactly what's being counted, and if any reasonable estimate for the implied energy content of the untraceable spending is included.... Now, maybe next I'll see an error in my theory that adding to things makes them larger! That would be a stupendous relief. ;-)
ph
phil, if you simply look around and guestimate what isn't consumed by buildings, those items falls into either transportation, agriculture, industry, and some other stuff. we spend way more time inside, using buildings, using stuff in buildings, and living inside. so 40% seems reasonable and maybe low. While some folks eat outside, most cooking and consuming of stuff is inside, so where do you draw the line between production and consumption?????
the flood
Ah yes.... That's exactly the rub! 40% sounds reasonable, for the share of the nation's business involved in making and using buildings. What that thought process assumes is included, and what people actually measure for building energy impacts, are entirely different though...! What ASHRAE, LEED, Energy Star and life-cycle analysis (LCA), as well as architects and individuals, *all* count as their energy use is their 'receipts' for energy expenditures. The true total energy use involved with buildings may is 10 times that. Can you guess what a discrepancy between global totals and what's locally accountable might be due to...?
If there's energy use we can't directly count for might we carry an estimate for it as an 'uncertainty' or a 'contingency' or 'implied' in our impact tabulations? The problem, I think, is everyone is considering just what they see as their little part, so our accounting is not inclusive. To help us make choices, what we want to get to is the whole impact of our *choices*. We seem to be getting, though, is just the impacts of what's *easily accounted*, and because that's a small part of the total explains a lot about why sustainability is having so little effect.
Holy Moly - Hertz now has a Green Collection for car rentals. You can choose from a Ford Fusion, Toyota Carrolla, Camry and Prius. I am such a happy girl.
Tuna...
I saw that too. They are actually pushing an advertising campaign in multiple formats/media with this message...
So....more badddd news, It's amazing how it accumulates when all you want is for it to all go away. I watched a wonderful webcast, and you can look in tomorrow, all day, catching day 2 of the National Academy of Sciences Energy summit. It's the best of the nation's best scientists and leading administration officials talking about where we are and where we go.
http://www7.nationalacademies.org/energysummit/
Anyway, the scientists are all calling the incomprehensibly difficult problems that the mounting evidence presents "extremely challenging" and that "time is not our friend" because of "scope creep", though still failing to notice that learning curves that get ever steeper indicate you're actually working on completely the wrong problem... People are even beginning to wonder how we could have previously not noticed that using productive land to replace energy that formerly came from underground displaces entirely what the land was used for before, causing considerable disruptions already.
To a few it's becoming clearer now, it would be more feasible to figure out a way to stabilize the economies without harm than to stabilize their endless multiplying expansion without harm. No one is yet willing to broach the subject in actual public discussion though. Hell, I may even have to go back to work, having misjudged the climate myself!!
So, it occurred to me to calculate the equivalent number of bags of charcoal we each of us dump out on our sidewalks each month, along with that of all our neighbors, for nature to clean up, corresponding to the fuels used to deliver our goods and services. It's a nice round number, ~100 bags 20lb each, for every family or individual making $50k, each month. The schemes are grand, but the most optimistic scenario even with consistent heroic efforts on everyone's part seems to be only to slow the growth of that to doubling by 2050.
must be a better problem to solve somewhere in that.... ;-)
Found this article about the risks of mold growth in LEED buildings rather interesting. I for one, would never have thought it would be an issue.
tuna...
Having only briefly perused the article, I wonder if this is mainly a result of or found in mostly tightly sealed buildings?
Or is it just the opposite. The more tightly sealed and effecient a buildings is the lower it's chances of molding..
That seems to be the crux of their arguement...More ventilation equals potentially more moisture?
ncarb is being rather hypocritical in attacking LEED, since they don't even address sustainability in the ARE's. Are they trying to educate folks or scare them???
any good energy management plan must be subservient to adequate moisture control - its not an either or situation, but a both and.
that the building ventilation flush out can introduce excessive moisture is a good point.
nam- their point is that a balance is needed between ventilation, tightness, and energy performance...
Nobody ever said that architecture is easy.
Tree...
That was my take, that they were basically saying be careful....Duhhh!
In Rotterdam they are making a sustainable dance club, including an energy-generating dance floor.
sustainabledanceclub.com
The ideas for this club come from Döll - Atelier voor Bouwkunst
check out the vulcan project's map of CO2 emissions.
their video has some great animation
the old analysis
the new analysis
power plants
industrial point sources
mobile sources
composite map with 10x10km rez
its green week on wheel of fortune...
for the green geek and apathetic american, check out this tv show on human footprint
barry, that is an awesome website... green thread content aside
Hey TK - better watch it... I resemble that remark ;o)
is anybody creating a zero carbon USA plan?
also just found after gutenburg blog that has some very smart discussion about energy and climate change with this great graphic:
no, i'm not trying to inflate my post count, but this surfing session has uncovered lots of cool stuff...
[url=http://www.climatetechnology.gov/Marlay--PresentationToDCCEAS--23Feb2008.pdf]climate tech ppt[/ur] from the DC Council of Engineering and Architectural Societies Engineers Week Awards Banquet back in February, thanks to the EERE.
From that presentation, VT, CA & PA have the most policies and laws addressing carbon emissions and florida has the least!
I need some advice on solar pumps for a pool. Has anyone ever spec'd this before? Any knowledge of wind pumps...sounds funny - but I am assuming there is such a thing. Oh and affordable!
as you can guess I'm aiming as part of the green manifesto to make my home as eco-friendly as possible.
Hi Green TC -
Can someone give me some ideas of where I can go to find some Life Cycle Costs and Analyses for green initiatives? For whatever reason my computer is not linking to the site the USGBC has on their website. Thanks.
tuna- theGBI.org has some simple LCA spreadsheets templetes. haven't check out how easy they are to use, but they seem reasonable for standard construction methodologies and simple assemblies.
atechno- most pool supply places should have info on such devices, but I don't know any specific mfrs. happy splashing.
Two points for installing bike racks and changing rooms? TWO POINTS?????? WTF? Am I the only one who finds this revision for LEED 2009 utterly ridiculous?
Hi all.......
I'll keep the explanation to a minimum and just ask if anybody is familiar with any resources re: heritage/preservation and energy issues. I have some decent (but not-so-in-depth) info but I could use more.
I'll be contributing to this thread a lot more now, too, 'cause....you guessed it, I'm working to 'greenify' heritage buildings this summer. Rock on.
slantsix: donovan rypkema
Ok, tuna, I confess: I don't understand your indignation at all. Are you saying that it's stupid that they are getting 2 points instead of 1, or that they should get more? I think it's fairly reasonable actually. Your own office (my former office) acted like they were going to be bike friendly by putting a shower in the basement. Last time I checked there was no shower head in that "storage room". And nevermind that they didn't put any bike racks out at all. So 2 points makes sense to me I guess.
slantsix....hmmm. I don't have much to say re: preservation, but if you have specific questions about energy issues, I can try to help.
I don't know where the proper place to post something like this and I don't really fee like starting a new thread, but has anyone ever gone the way of using ladybugs, praying mantises or other natural predators in their yard? How well did it work? Did you have problems with them leaving or dying?
I've started a compost heap (this will be my third attempt, yielding successful results prior). However this will be my first since I left undergrad/grad school. I'm looking at building a 36"x 36" container our of re-used 1"x 3" to approx 6" depth. The ground layer will be existing soil routed, a layer of the volcano's finest, my organic refuse, then cedar chips. The latter I'm adding because it seems to be the material of choice for commercial composters.
thoughts? I could do with the criticism - its been a while sine I've gardened and fearful my green thumb has turned
tuna-
IPM, integrated pest management, is well established at the commercial/institutional scale landscapes, less so at the residential scale. the key is providing habitat for the predators, or they will find someplace else to call home. Mixed planting beds with lots of flowers favored by pollinators, a water source, shelter via a brush pile/untrampled zones are key, and food. Lots of gardening mags have had articles about using beneficial bugs.
they'll leave if you don't make them feel at home...
a-techno- the latest on compost theory is to mix everything up, so you don't have layers of stuff.... If you don't have local worms to add to the mix, you may want to import some (but be careful about introducing invasives to the island). My favorite composting amendment is coffee grounds - forget the ceder chips unless they're freeeeeeee. keeping the pile moist and well aerated are important for progress towards black garden gold. Don't add meat/fats/pet or people poo, but anything else organic is great (egg shells are great too). lots of composting wisdom on the web. the worst case scenario, it take 4+ months instead of just two months to compost.
thanks TK, you are always a wealth of information. And i appreciate you being able to take the time to respond, particularly with the new demands of fatherhood.
There is a house down the block from mine; "house for a woodworker" when there are just bags of the stuff each week. So i picked up a few. I also have access to a fair amount of coffee trash too. So I'll add that to the mix. I didn't know about the pet poo - my first attempt had quite a bit of that stuff - and was how we realised that the dogs were reaching up and eating the orchids. The more advice the merrier
Okay here's a question - GeoThermal installation vs. traditonal HVAC system. Are any of the links on USGBC under ENERGY better than others? Any other websites I can go to to figure this out, or is this something that an engineer would be able to answer. I know very little about this topic and was just asked by the PM for info. YIKES!!! Please help a girl out. Thanks in advance.
Oh and Treekiller you'd be proud - I followed much of your compost heap advice and i have a steaming pile waiting for the completion of my bin. I have recycled a gal. coffee tin to use to collect my daily coffee grinds as well as natural waste (egg shells included), to add to the brush that I clear when gardening. The bin is being made of re-used timbers from the house demo, including the nails. Pictures will follow.
But I need a little more help. On this rock we aren't as eco saavy as well, everywhere else so we still bag most things from the grocery. I have purchased three shopping bags (post-composite) and have left one in each car but I keep forgetting to take it out when i go shopping. Any hints to remind myself - save stapling it to my hip?
this post has been simultaneously posted here.
maybe try wearing the bags on your head?
you made the first step in getting them. eventually you'll get in the habit of using them. don't despair if it takes a while...
compost goes faster the smaller the bits are. so chop up the brush the best you can. good luck!
tk, amen to the coffee compost...it's like 90% of the way there already! my two neighbors and i have had a very big communal compost bin that has been in operation for a solid decade...the thing's damn prolific!
HA! It took me a while to get used to taking my bags in with me when I shop too Atechno, but eventually you'll get the hang of it. I still forget sometimes and when I do I just leave my groceries in some out of the way corner and run back to the car to get it. Also if you have a small load, try just taking it with you sans any bag and then fill the bag once you get back to the car.
Mfrech and TK - thanks for reminding me... I've been meaning to take a covered container with me to work to gather coffee grounds. I'll go do that now.
once you get used to using canvas bags for groceries, you start taking them for everything.
btw, anyone see this: Green Noise Got You Down?
Accompanying photo:
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.