Energy Star tax credits
Energy flow chart
courtesy Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
SOME FACTOIDS
Who got us into this mess in the first place, along with 25 years of failed energy policy? The congress failed the math. We engineers have been warning for a generation about the need to upgrade systems to save energy. Many $ billions in great investments (8% annual ROI or higher). For decades, energy conservation has been ignored in favor of a lower first cost. Shortsighted. Now its really starting to hurt.
The presidents proposal is to create new work by replacing lighting and HVAC and increasing insulation. Here are the key items impacting buildings that we can focus on.
- $6.3 billion in state energy efficiency and clean energy grants
- $5 billion to weatherize modest-income homes
- $4.5 billion to make federal buildings more energy efficient
I wiil make this typical prediction on the value of the improvements:
Assume we upgrade the thermal performance of the buildings that Obama proposes to improve. On a one time outlay of $2.5 billon, the people will save about $450 million ANNUALLY per year for the life of those installations, which may be 70-100 years or more! Pay back in 5.5 years, (5.5 years x $450 million per year = $2.5 billion), the equivalent of a 12% return on investment, practically without any risk, net taxes! This return is incredible, a great investment. We are talking about a payback for generations to come. Why haven’t we done this already?
The pundits (the press and and the political establishment) that scoffed at this in February should be called on their stupid and ignorant criticism. They should to back their statements with facts. Why is it that no one mentioned the fact that 48% of the energy in this country is used by buildings!
Total U.S. energy consumption amounts to about $1.2 trillion per year, and buildings consume about $600 billion of this. The excess is in the form of imported oil. North America has the greatest energy resources on earth, so why are we importing oil at all?
Their ridicule of science and engineering economics illustrates that indeed, AMERICA is falling behind in general math and science. We may have the worlds finest colleges and universities, but there, in the media, (and the congress to lesser degree), are some of the most severely math and science challenged people you will find. We just said adios to one of the most math challenged presidents ever, George Bush.
One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind: Obama appointed a respected scientist to run the Department of Energy.
Tags: Energy
HVAC DATA model from LBNL
BetterBricks.com
Database of Energy and $ Incentives
From Horsepower to Hearpower, Part 1: The Foundations of Power and Energy
Oil Industry started (Drake's well in PA)
The Energy Collective
Architecture 2030
Jerry Yudelson
Spring is right around the corner-it’s a great time to look into all the latest research and benefits of clean and renewable geothermal energy-it makes a lot of sense tapping into the earth for this super efficient and sustainable answer to our energy problems.
[...] Our built environment uses up lots of energy. Around forty percent of the global energy usage is for heating, cooling, and lighting buildings (http://www.noelsusskind.com/blog/archives/124) [...]
ive heard the 48% statistic about building use several times. can you direct me to where you got this figure? thanks!
This approximation comes from the US Department of Energy, the International Energy Agency, and others. The chart above comes from the USDOE.
48% is a bit fudged, as I think lighting, hvac and hot water usage by themselves is only 40% of the total energy budget. They may be including some overhead in the form of sewer and water services to account for 8%.