# A Sustainable Economy? Ideas on how to get there.



## Frozen Canuck (Sep 8, 2013)

I have listened to this particular talk a few times & thought I would share it here & see what it generates in terms of discussion. Maybe like the economist says, all we really need is triple digit oil prices & the rest will work itself out.

Hope the link works, if not you can listen here: www.cbc.ca/ideas/episodes/2013/03/13/the-end-of-growth/

Yep, link wont allow an extension, sorry you will have to copy to your browser. ETA tried it & link works.

Fair warning 54 mins long so maybe while your working in the house & can crank up the volume.


----------



## dougstove (Sep 8, 2013)

I have read (forget where) that our current period is a sort of end-of-childhood examination period for humanity.
-Will we get through the ~2050 population peak before ecosystem collapse?
-Will we learn to manage income distribution in a stable economy, rather than relying on continual rapid growth?

If we pass, we could head into a golden age.
If we fail our test, things will be dismal.
The current per capita GDP of the world is already ~$10,000, which for a family of 4 is $40,000.
If we did things right, that is not bad.

What worries me is our short attention span.  We are bad at paying attention to routine improvements, and we are bad at distinguishing the important (energy policy) from the trivial (Miley Cyrus).


----------



## btuser (Sep 9, 2013)

10k per person would mean USA GDP is to be cut by 75%.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 9, 2013)

Our whole economy is "underwater" IMO, unsustainable,even for the midterm let alone the long term. Probably healthcare is at the top of the list of unsustainables followed by defense,interest on the debt and retirement promises,not necessarily in that order,pick your poison. Triple digit oil prices would only collapse the house of cards more quickly.


----------



## btuser (Sep 9, 2013)

We already have tripe digit oil.  The debt is a tally of defense spending for protection that we provide.  Japan, Europe,  and until recently China are depending on us to keep the spice flowing.  Their currency reserves are our debt that we used to pay for our military.   

The petrodollar's days are numbered for sure.  However the tech for renewables is still not competitive.  We've got a few more years of empire left.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 9, 2013)

btuser said:


> We already have tripe digit oil.  The debt is a tally of defense spending for protection that we provide.  .


The debt includes much more than defense spending. 1.3 trillion just for the bush tax cuts alone. Add in all the other govt spending that is underfunded,they are now borrowing(started this year) to pay current SS recipients.Cashing in all those SS IOUs. Still paying for 2 previous wars. Its a whole package of unsustainability. IT will be interesting to see who gets a cut of the ever shrinking pie. I guess whoever has the most lobbiest,s and the deepest pockets. The nations wealth has largely already been transfered to the 1%.


----------



## Where2 (Sep 9, 2013)

While everything continues to sort itself out, I will continue life with a pair of 40+mpg vehicles in my driveway, and a grid-tied 4.4kW PV system on my roof. (generated 20.3kWh today)

I'm continually baffled by people who work hard for what $$ they make, only to choose to give large chunks of their hard earned personal wealth away on frivolous stuff.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Sep 10, 2013)

The economy currently requires additional generations to be larger, and to feed money to those already retired.

We used to call that a pyramid scheme.

As an advocate for population stabilization and reduction, it gives me heartburn


----------



## firebroad (Sep 10, 2013)

We cannot sustain ourselves if we continue to be a nation of consumers.  Just try to ask people to do without.   I am as guilty as others, I have come to depend on the creature comforts; however, I suppose I feel as though I have earned them after a lifetime of hard work and sacrifice.  
Like AP said, we cannot sustain our current momentum in population for long.


----------



## Grisu (Sep 10, 2013)

I think that economist underestimates what a sustainable economy really means. To become truly sustainable we need to:

- not use any non-renewable resource (non-renewable on a timescale relevant to humankind like 100,000 or maybe 1,000,000 years)
- have zero waste that cannot be reused or returned to the biosphere to be used there (without accumulation like carbon dioxide)
- to not use any resource beyond its regenerative limit; e. g. no draw-down of already preexisting stocks (like catching more fish than grows up per year)
- use only renewable energy sources like sun (and its derivatives), geothermal, gravitation (e. g. tide), nuclear fusion (if we ever figure it out) and maybe nuclear fission (depends how long we have fissionable material). 

Judging from those, we are far, far beyond a sustainable economy. Ask yourself when you drop something in your garbage can how sustainable that is.


----------



## Delta-T (Sep 10, 2013)

No worries friends...just choose your faction now...Morlocks or Eloi? Just a 'heads up', for those who desire to join my team (the Morlocks of course)...invest in BBQ sauce.... by the case load.


----------



## firebroad (Sep 10, 2013)

Delta-T said:


> No worries friends...just choose your faction now...Morlocks or Eloi? Just a 'heads up', for those who desire to join my team (the Morlocks of course)...invest in BBQ sauce.... by the case load.


  Yoikes!


----------



## Jags (Sep 10, 2013)

Delta-T said:


> ...invest in BBQ sauce.... by the case load.



Hoisin sauce will also mask gamey flavors.


----------



## dougstove (Sep 10, 2013)

btuser said:


> 10k per person would mean USA GDP is to be cut by 75%.


But what fraction of current USA GDP is counting expenditures of borrowed money on current consumption?


----------



## Grisu (Sep 10, 2013)

dougstove said:


> But what fraction of current USA GDP is counting expenditures of borrowed money on current consumption?



All money is borrowed money; the question is only by whom and when.


----------



## fossil (Sep 10, 2013)

Mara, come quick, we have to run away from Delta-T.  NOW, HURRY, Mara, HURRY


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Sep 10, 2013)

I dunno. Yvette Mimieux, and more or less pissa fruit for a good run of say 25 years...

Delta can bite me


----------



## fossil (Sep 10, 2013)

Whoa, and here all along, I thought Delta-T had_ four _fingers on each hand.


----------



## begreen (Sep 10, 2013)

That's not delta, no mankini.


----------



## Delta-T (Sep 11, 2013)

begreen said:


> That's not delta, no mankini.


the likeness is staggering, but its all about the details.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Boy did this thread veer off course ,where are the Mods?


----------



## Jags (Sep 11, 2013)

Seasoned Oak said:


> Boy did this thread veer off course ,where are the Mods?



There are already 3 here, how many more do you want?

(A course correction is easy - simply post something that applies to the subject matter.)


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Jags said:


> There are already 3 here, how many more do you want?
> 
> (A course correction is easy - simply post something that applies to the subject matter.)


Thats OK pictures of "hot"woman should be included in every thread, new rules!


----------



## Jags (Sep 11, 2013)

In the honor of course correction:
Sustainability is a constantly changing target.  I remember when 100 bushel per acre corn was a big deal.  Now 200+ is expected.  Changes like this move the target.  Now how many people can we feed?? (just one example).


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Jags said:


> In the honor of course correction:
> Sustainability is a constantly changing target.  I remember when 100 bushel per acre corn was a big deal.  Now 200+ is expected.  Changes like this move the target.  Now how many people can we feed?? (just one example).


We can now grow food with LED lights in hydro tanks with fish underneath. Dont even need sunlight. Some old buildings use indoor compost for heat in winter as well. A nice repurpose use of old abandoned buildings. Might work well in detroit.


----------



## Jags (Sep 11, 2013)

Seasoned Oak said:


> We can now grow food with LED lights in hydro tanks with fish underneath. Dont even need sunlight.



Keep in mind - that LED light is just recycled sun light. (if not natural sun, it takes tricity to make light (which can be made from sun)).


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

[


Jags said:


> Keep in mind - that LED light is just recycled sun light. (if not natural sun, it takes tricity to make light (which can be made from sun)).


If you get it from nuclear power the sun is not involved in any way. Just about every other source of electric involves the sun. IF we were to experience a severe cooling event it would be one of the few ways to grow food.


----------



## Delta-T (Sep 11, 2013)

there is some axiom or such that dictates that whenever we create higher efficiency, or production, we then find a way to use up that gain...through growth, or  other form of exploitation. We could probably think out, to some degree where the theoretical tipping point is, but like Jags says, its a moving target. In the end, there are a lot of cultural shifts that need to happen to really acheive "sustainability"...I'm a big fan of raising the cost of things, to encourage less waste, rather than find new, fancy, technology based ways to increase production.


----------



## Grisu (Sep 11, 2013)

Jags said:


> In the honor of course correction:
> Sustainability is a constantly changing target.  I remember when 100 bushel per acre corn was a big deal.  Now 200+ is expected.  Changes like this move the target.  Now how many people can we feed?? (just one example).



Don't forget that those plants need nutrients to grow which we are currently not returning back when we consume them. Right now we use artificial fertilizer to fill that gap made among others from natural gas. Sustainable farm yields look different IMHO.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Delta-T said:


> I'm a big fan of raising the cost of things, to encourage less waste, rather than find new, fancy, technology based ways to increase production.


Thats right ,until the cost of gas goes over $5 you wont see a sustained effort to get off it. THe people that control it know that:and try to keep it low as to "addict" as many of the worlds people as possible before demand intersects the downward curve of production.


----------



## Jags (Sep 11, 2013)

Fertilizer is not really a concern of mine.  We are literally full of it.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Grisu said:


> Don't forget that those plants need nutrients to grow which we are currently not returning back when we consume them. Right now we use artificial fertilizer to fill that gap made among others from natural gas. Sustainable farm yields look different IMHO.


In the case of aquaculture the fish are providing the nutrients. ANd the plants in turn are purifying the water for the fish. All natural.


----------



## Grisu (Sep 11, 2013)

Delta-T said:


> there is some axiom or such that dictates that whenever we create higher efficiency, or production, we then find a way to use up that gain...through growth, or  other form of exploitation. We could probably think out, to some degree where the theoretical tipping point is, but like Jags says, its a moving target. In the end, there are a lot of cultural shifts that need to happen to really acheive "sustainability"...I'm a big fan of raising the cost of things, to encourage less waste, rather than find new, fancy, technology based ways to increase production.



That is called Jevon's paradox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
It can be seen e. g. in cars. Car engines have vastly increased their efficiency compared with decades ago. However, those  achievements were mostly offset by heavier cars with more features. The effect on average mpg has been minimal.


----------



## Grisu (Sep 11, 2013)

Seasoned Oak said:


> In the case of aquaculture the fish are providing the nutrients. ANd the plants in turn are purifying the water for the fish. All natural.



So you are not planning on eating any of the fish or the plants then?


----------



## Grisu (Sep 11, 2013)

Jags said:


> Fertilizer is not really a concern of mine.  We are literally full of it.



I guess you got my point. That human "fertilizer" needs to go back to those fields where we grow our food. Right now it goes to the dump or in the water treatment plant.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Grisu said:


> So you are not planning on eating any of the fish or the plants then?


Of course there is a % that can be harvested on a regular basis. 
http://www.twincities.com/ci_222900...ertilize-plants-maplewood-warehouses-thriving


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

From the article:It's a finely tuned animal-plant balance that produces 40,000 fish and 460,000 edible plants a year, in an area the size of four semi-trucks.
The farm could be replicated anywhere -- cities, mountains, deserts, in cold or hot climates. So Roeser dreams of building farms around the world. Winter and summer, it produces more than 100 fish and 1,200 edible plants a day, like clockwork. Even with a foot of snow on the ground outside.


----------



## Jags (Sep 11, 2013)

Grisu said:


> I guess you got my point. That human "fertilizer" needs to go back to those fields where we grow our food. Right now it goes to the dump or in the water treatment plant.



Not only that, but if the market required (price point allowed), we could be harvesting fertilizer from places like the dead zone in the delta of the Mississippi.  Several other options are also available, just not financially feasible at this time.


----------



## Grisu (Sep 11, 2013)

Jags said:


> Not only that, but if the market required (price point allowed), we could be harvesting fertilizer from places like the dead zone in the delta of the Mississippi.  Several other options are also available, just not financially feasible at this time.



To become sustainable we also would have to use a sustainable energy source to carry the food to us and the manure back to the fields. Plus, current "human waste" is full of contaminants like chemotherapeutics, antibiotics etc. plus other stuff we collect in the same waste stream. That is also the reason (beside financials which may actually not look so bad) why the waste from the water treatment plant often goes to the dump instead of being used as compost.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Another plus here is the product is vegetables and fish,part of a healthy diet. The guy is not growing cheesburgers and fries. This could be done in a cave along with mushrooms ,another healthy food. (if need be)


----------



## Grisu (Sep 11, 2013)

Seasoned Oak said:


> Of course there is a % that can be harvested on a regular basis.
> http://www.twincities.com/ci_222900...ertilize-plants-maplewood-warehouses-thriving



Not saying it is a bad idea but when you take those amounts of food out you need to put back in the same amount of matter just in a different form. You cannot have a bag of sugar, take out 1 cup at a time and only put 1/2 cup back and think that is sustainable. Material input and material output must be the same; only energy can be supplied in excess (mostly thanks to the sun).


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Grisu said:


> Not saying it is a bad idea but when you take those amounts of food out you need to put back in the same amount of matter just in a different form. You cannot have a bag of sugar, take out 1 cup at a time and only put 1/2 cup back and think that is sustainable. Material input and material output must be the same; only energy can be supplied in excess (mostly thanks to the sun).


The feedstock here is electricity and fish food pellets as opposed to chemical fertilizer,pesticides,herbicides,diesel fuel ect. on a farm.You would have to compare this method of food production with conventional farming to see if its cost effective at todays food prices. It may be more cost effective already.


----------



## Jags (Sep 11, 2013)

What trees grow fish food pellets? (I know that was being a smarty pants).  Point is - still has to be manufactured with a feed stock and shipped to the "farm".


----------



## Delta-T (Sep 11, 2013)

i dont think there's much of a "technology" hurdle to designing fairly closed loop agro-animal protein systems...the hurlde is financial. We could rescue the worlds deserts through mass plantings and irrigation, but its pretty pricey. We're still a "low hanging fruit" group. We pretty much wait until the 23rd hour of the day to create action. Biodome type experimants have been done, and though there are some shortcomings, we know they are pretty feasible. I dont know that we'll even need to go to the extent of a movie like Silent Running, but I don't think something like that is impossible, and if we stay on course, with space exploration, we might even find ourselves proving it out.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Jags said:


> What trees grow fish food pellets? (I know that was being a smarty pants).  Point is - still has to be manufactured with a feed stock and shipped to the "farm".



Can be recycled from fish or animal slaughter waste.If the goal is sustainability in the food supply this may be more sustainable and long term cost effective than bleaching topsoil with chemical fertilizers and then polluting it with pesticides to grow unhealthy food. Plus i think we need to get away from hauling our food as much as 3000 miles from the source.IMO
As a bonus you get 2 for 1 with this method. Both fish and vegetables.


----------



## Ehouse (Sep 11, 2013)

Chickens.  gotta work chickens in there somehow.  Yum.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 11, 2013)

Ehouse said:


> Chickens.  gotta work chickens in there somehow.  Yum.


And watermelons


----------



## Ehouse (Sep 11, 2013)

Seasoned Oak said:


> And watermelons


A Chicalapilon, yum!


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Sep 23, 2013)

Delta-T said:


> there is some axiom or such that dictates that whenever we create higher efficiency, or production, we then find a way to use up that gain...through growth, or  other form of exploitation. We could probably think out, to some degree where the theoretical tipping point is, but like Jags says, its a moving target. In the end, there are a lot of cultural shifts that need to happen to really acheive "sustainability"*...I'm a big fan of raising the cost of things, to encourage less waste, rather than find new, fancy, technology based ways to increase production.*



I took that as being the larger point of the audio discussion (maybe it's just me). The reference in the audio was to oil prices however the same thing applies to all goods. Price goes up, usage goes down & folks get thinking about conservation rather than consumption. Possibly because oil is the linch pin for just about everything that was the focus of the audio. 

I like Jags & others was raised on a multi generational family farm & in my lifetime I have seen us get so upside down on so many issues re: sustainability. When I sit & ponder it I often think if oil were not so cheap & easy would it have been different?

Too late to go back & change it now, I just wonder how big the mess is/will be, that we will leave to others.


----------



## begreen (Sep 23, 2013)

Centralized systems tend to favor power, profit and often destroy diversity and sometimes communities. Locally we are shifting from centralized, shipped agriculture to local farms. Part of that is rescuing great crop land from development. Another part is a switch to keep much more of the economy and the flow of money local by switching to local credit unions that are more amenable to loans for local projects and housing.


----------



## btuser (Sep 23, 2013)

I was reading up on LED farming.  Apparently chlorophyll(s) need very little of the spectrum produced in natural light and much of it is in fact harmful to the plants. Its going to be a big deal for local farming when the cost comes down.

I don't know about the fish.  Animals are not very efficient protein producing machines.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Sep 24, 2013)

btuser said:


> I was reading up on LED farming.  Apparently chlorophyll(s) need very little of the spectrum produced in natural light and much of it is in fact harmful to the plants. Its going to be a big deal for local farming when the cost comes down.
> 
> I don't know about the fish.  Animals are not very efficient protein producing machines.


As for most bang for your buck in the calorie and nutrient department- you may be right, but there's a lot of these symbiotic farms- fish poop hydroponically fertilizes the plants, some plant byproduct, plus algae and incidental local insects feed the fish, etc.


----------



## Jags (Sep 24, 2013)

And I thought I was brilliant with my combination bird feeder/cat feeder.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Sep 24, 2013)

"Humanure" is practiced small scale in the US, along with Milorganite- fertilizer made from sewage and available at Home Despot. I heard an NPR story about some Asian country that seriously boosted orchard production by use of human waste compost.


Lee Hays- Compost Yourself

If I should die before I wake,
All my bones and sinew take;
Put me in the compost pile,
And decompose me for a while.

Wind, water, rain will have their way,
Returning me to common clay!
All that I am will feed the trees,
and little fishes in the seas.

On radishes and corn you munch--
You might be having me for lunch!
And then excrete me with a grin--
Chortling, "There goes Lee again!!"


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Sep 24, 2013)

Good one AP. 

Sad that most are so far removed from the food chain & just don't get it. Heck even I have nephew's & nieces that think milk comes from a jug in a store.


----------



## Delta-T (Sep 24, 2013)

On an older episode of the Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern he was in Thailand (could have been in South America as well) i thinks eating "poo-poo pig" is a pig who's diet is human poop...it lived under the "outhouse"....he said it is veeeery tasty, a delicacy even. If we just round up some of those ferel hogs, put in sewer systems of New York.....you get the idea.


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Sep 24, 2013)

Delta-T said:


> On an older episode of the Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern he was in Thailand (could have been in South America as well) i thinks eating "poo-poo pig" is a pig who's diet is human poop...it lived under the "outhouse"....he said it is veeeery tasty, a delicacy even. If we just round up some of those ferel hogs, put in sewer systems of New York.....you get the idea.



A new sausage for all those street vendors to sell perhaps?   Count me out thanks just the same.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 25, 2013)

I used to look at my 6,  250 Gal oil tanks. (a years supply) and think WOW thats a lot of FF For 1 family, for 1 home, for 1 winter. Once the winter is over the oil is gone ,the heat is gone and the money is gone. Now i look at a smaller pile of solid local fuel,one renewable and one non -renewable (coal and wood) and i still think its too big to be sustainable long term. I feel better about solid local fuels than with the oil but i still think im using too much. Solar and insulation are on my mind now.


----------



## begreen (Sep 25, 2013)

> I used to look at my 6, 250 Gal oil tanks. (a years supply)



You're kidding, right?


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Sep 25, 2013)

1500 US Gallons! 

Yes, that's pretty steep, even for up here with a design temp of -40. Insulation & draft sealing for sure. Solar can wait until it can actually hold heat.


----------



## dougstove (Sep 25, 2013)

The LED lighting for photosynthesis is not a perpetual motion machine, but it is intriguing.
The photosynthetic system actually turns over at an absolute maximum of about 1000 electrons per second (about 1000 us turnover time).
For each cycle, a flash a few microseconds is long enough to start the process; most of the biochemistry can proceed in the dark.

LED can cycle on/off nearly instantaneously.
So for 1 second, an LED can pulse 1000 times, on each time for perhaps 50 us, with 950 us of dark in between.
This means the LED can actually be off most of the time.
Plus, with the correct wavelength, the LED output can be converted efficiently to photosynthetic product.
The Dutch did work on this.
If the switching circuits etc. can be sufficiently efficient, the energetics can get interesting, at least theoretically.
I have a similar system in my lab, for ml quantities of phytoplankton.


----------



## btuser (Sep 26, 2013)

Frozen Canuck said:


> 1500 US Gallons?


Not a large amount for a lot of homes.  The oil companies rarely tell you how much you use unless you ask.  Ditto for any other fuel company.  The result is a lot of people don't even know how much they use.  I know we on this site are often obsessed with BTUs(guilty!) but we are not the norm.   

My friend replaced his boiler with a new 3 pass flue,+ or, yet his claimed his fuel usage didn't go down.  I got out the Bacharach kit and low-n-behold after a 10 minute burn he was holding steady at 65% EFF.  Apparently if you leave the air wide open you get a nice clean burn.  Speeds up your seasonal tuneups and you burn more oil.  Its a win/win baby!


----------



## begreen (Sep 26, 2013)

Read up on my last post in the Requiem for nuclear energy thread. Nuclear may not be dead, just evolving. It will be interesting to see if the Chinese or Indians pick up on this technology soon.


----------



## stoveguy2esw (Sep 26, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> "Humanure" is practiced small scale in the US, along with Milorganite- fertilizer made from sewage and available at Home Despot. I heard an NPR story about some Asian country that seriously boosted orchard production by use of human waste compost.
> 
> 
> Lee Hays- Compost Yourself
> ...


 


Korea does a lot of organic fertilization of the human waste variety, used to hate runing the perimeter road on monday mornings at Cp Humphreys ROK  the base is nearly completely surrounded by rice paddies and when they flood them to start the season the odor is quite dramatic


----------



## woodgeek (Sep 26, 2013)

btuser said:


> Not a large amount for a lot of homes.  The oil companies rarely tell you how much you use unless you ask.  Ditto for any other fuel company.  The result is a lot of people don't even know how much they use.  I know we on this site are often obsessed with BTUs(guilty!) but we are not the norm.



Agreed.  Out of sight out of mind (esp when it was cheap).  My average sized 1960 house down the road from Randy burned 1300 gals the first year we had it.  I was surprised since the similar house I grew up in in MA only used ~600 in the 70s.  I guess folks were pretty careless with airsealing and insulation here in the 'South' unlike the Yankees up North.

Only had 1 250 gal tank though....just needed it filled every 2-3 weeks in January.


----------



## jharkin (Sep 26, 2013)

btuser said:


> My friend replaced his boiler with a new 3 pass flue,+ or, yet his claimed his fuel usage didn't go down. I got out the Bacharach kit and low-n-behold after a 10 minute burn he was holding steady at 65% EFF. Apparently if you leave the air wide open you get a nice clean burn. Speeds up your seasonal tuneups and you burn more oil. Its a win/win baby!



And since most oil consumers have their maintenance done by the company who sells them the oil, 'tis not suprising.

Reminds me of our last apartment before we bought the house.  Typical Boston suburbs 2 family. 1920s construction, still heated by oil fired steam, with a 1950 vintage American Radiator coal to oil conversion boiler in the basement. the kicker, was that our landlord owned an oil company and sold us the oil.  Between that and it being a rental they never had any incentive to change out that old beast in the basement. 

We would fill that 250 gallon tank every 6 weeks.  For a one level second floor apartment! And I turned the heat down to 60 during the work day!

never again.


----------



## Where2 (Sep 28, 2013)

Seasoned Oak said:


> I used to look at my 6,  250 Gal oil tanks. (a years supply) and think WOW that's a lot of FF For 1 family, for 1 home, for 1 winter. Once the winter is over the oil is gone, the heat is gone and the money is gone. Now, I look at a smaller pile of solid local fuel, one non-renewable and one renewable (coal and wood) and I still think its too big to be sustainable long term. I feel better about solid local fuels than with the oil but i still think I'm using too much. Solar and insulation are on my mind now.



Driving back from working out of town last night, I spent some time discussing with a co-worker the fact that I've managed to get my total electric use down around 1,100kWh/mo for my all electric house in South Florida in the hottest month of the year (despite the A/C compressor running 130 hours total). One of the things I was marveling at is how lousy the insulation and air sealing in most homes in Florida must be. (we both own homes >25 years old, although mine is 51 years old) Simply keeping a home air conditioned with a 10°-25° temperature differential below the outside temperatures _should_ be easy in comparison to keeping a house warm in winter up north when you have >40°F temperature differential between outside and inside spaces. How much more efficient would a house in FL be, if you treated it like it was a northern house where >40° temperature differentials were common? My co-worker commented that he really needs to "add some insulation in the attic". 

As Seasoned Oak points out, once the heating season (or cooling season in my case) is gone, the $$$ is gone. That $$$ doesn't grow back, I have to go out and work for the $$$ to replace it. If I'm going to work for it, why not work smarter and use that $$$ toward air sealing and insulation to break the cycle?  

Are air sealing, attic and wall insulation really the main keys to how to keep that >40°F temperature differential from consuming your bank account or your wood stock pile?


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 28, 2013)

begreen said:


> You're kidding, right?


Thats what i used initially before making some changes. Adding the solar room knocked those 6 tanks down to about 4+/-.
I added some insulation. Then changed to all solid fuel either coal or wood. Now if all coal i use about 5 ton. I never went the whole winter on wood where i live,but use it exclusively in project homes and workshops. Im a great believer in solar and will do more with that in the future. I marvel at the fact that my central heat does not run all day and into the night,every sunny winter day.


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Sep 28, 2013)

Where2 said:


> Are air sealing, attic and wall insulation really the main keys to how to keep that >40°F temperature differential from consuming your bank account or your wood stock pile?



Bingo. Structures need to retain the energy placed in them via whatever means. Otherwise they are little more than well decorated tents. You should be looking at the same R values in a Florida house as we would here. Only difference is we are looking to keep the warm in & the cold out, you are looking to do the reverse. Either way a well insulated, properly sealed structure will perform far better than a drafty old whatever. The higher energy prices go the more economic sense this makes. Basically up here even with cheap nat gas your fastest ROI is in insulation & sealing. You should have a faster ROI as in most locations electricity that drives AC units is more expensive per btu than nat gas.


----------



## begreen (Sep 28, 2013)

Exactly right. Essentially we are all heating sieves.


----------



## woodgeek (Sep 28, 2013)

Where2, remember latent heat loads (related to dehumidifacation).  25°F diff for cooling and high humidity might be a similar load to 40°F diff in heating.  Of course, that makes airsealing EVEN MORE sensible, since it contributes to sensible and latent heat.


----------



## Where2 (Sep 29, 2013)

Frozen Canuck said:


> You should have a faster ROI as in most locations electricity that drives AC units is more expensive per btu than nat gas.


 Electric runs ~$0.115/kWh. Looks like a Therm of NG = ~29.3kWh  = or roughly $3.37 at my electric rates. BLS reports that in July 2013, the average cost of utility piped NG in my area was $1.52/therm. With that in mind, gaining BTU's that need to be removed using electricity looks twice as expensive as losing BTU's that need to be put back with an NG consuming heating device. (Yes, I recognize I have entirely over simplified the difference in mechanical efficiency between an A/C unit and a NG fired boiler/furnace). 

Woodgeek, I certainly live in a region of high humidity. I keep forgetting about the energy cost to remove all that moisture.


----------



## woodgeek (Sep 29, 2013)

Where2 said:


> Electric runs ~$0.115/kWh. Looks like a Therm of NG = ~29.3kWh  = or roughly $3.37 at my electric rates. BLS reports that in July 2013, the average cost of utility piped NG in my area was $1.52/therm. With that in mind, gaining BTU's that need to be removed using electricity looks twice as expensive as losing BTU's that need to be put back with an NG consuming heating device. (Yes, I recognize I have entirely over simplified the difference in mechanical efficiency between an A/C unit and a NG fired boiler/furnace).
> 
> Woodgeek, I certainly live in a region of high humidity. I keep forgetting about the energy cost to remove all that moisture.



Its not just the efficiency, AC has a multiplier effect.  The Coefficient of Performance is the SEER/3.414. If you have SEER 14, that is a COP = 4.  IOW, 1 kW of electricity can pump 4 kW of heat.  So, while your elec is 2X per kW what gas costs, your AC bill should be only **half** what your gas bill would be at the same temp diff in heating.  Except for latent heat.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Sep 29, 2013)

woodgeek said:


> Its not just the efficiency, AC has a multiplier effect.  The Coefficient of Performance is the SEER/3.414. If you have SEER 14, that is a COP = 4.  IOW, 1 kW of electricity can pump 4 kW of heat.  So, while your elec is 2X per kW what gas costs, your AC bill should be only **half** what your gas bill would be at the same temp diff in heating.  Except for latent heat.


THat works as well for heat not just AC Right? IF you heat pump is a SEER 14 your heat is approx. 1/4 the KW use of electric resistance heating. If i understand this  right. I am looking at mini split units with a  25-27 SEER ratings.


----------



## woodgeek (Sep 30, 2013)

Seasoned Oak said:


> THat works as well for heat not just AC Right? IF you heat pump is a SEER 14 your heat is approx. 1/4 the KW use of electric resistance heating. If i understand this  right. I am looking at mini split units with a  25-27 SEER ratings.



Almost.  The COP in heating and cooling are never the same, different seasonal temp differences, defrosting/latent conditions, etc.  For heating COP you divide the HSPF by 3.414.  For a mini in your area, you will prob get a **seasonal** average of COP = 3 in heating, maybe closer to 4 during mild weather.  I'd run with a conservative 3 for costing and ROI estimation (HSPF = 10-11).  My conventional Goodman ASHP gets me seasonal COP = 2.3 or so including defrost losses, after years of tweaking.  It started out at 1.6 as installed.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Oct 3, 2013)

With the efficiency of these new mini splits (25-27) I think i could get 90% of my yearly space heating and cooling at a very low cost leaving the coldest days to the wood stove for virtual free heat.


----------



## begreen (Oct 3, 2013)

Correctly sized and installed mini-split heat pumps do reduce a heating bill incredibly.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Oct 3, 2013)

begreen said:


> Correctly sized and installed mini-split heat pumps do reduce a heating bill incredibly.


And probably an AC bill as well. With the general warming trend and october days in the 80s that may be a welcome feature.


----------



## jebatty (Oct 6, 2013)

I believe a sustainable economy can only be achieved by conservation efforts plus behavioral change far beyond what most of us now are willing to do or pay for, and therefore a sustainable economy is much more a matter of will than technology. Energy waste with current behavior is immense. Behavior in changed usage (not just insulation or devices that provide the same perceived benefit but use less energy) directed at energy use reduction is truly monumental. For example, the led or lcd TV uses much less power than the CRT screen, and using an led or lcd TV the same amount of time as a previous CRT TV does result in use of less energy, but reducing use of the TV results in energy savings which approach 100%. Similarly, using the current darling mini-split achieves much higher efficiency and reduces energy usage over more traditional forms of heating/cooling while maintaining the same cooling or heating temperature, but raising the cooling temp (and wear fewer clothes or get used to it) or reducing the heating temp (put on a sweater or get used to it) results in even more substantial energy savings. The list is endless.

For my household, we are adding a 6.5kw solar voltaic grid-tied system. Our house is all electric except for wood heat + electric baseboard backup. I would like to move to reduce annual usage to not exceed solar production. Given our current behaviors, this will be a challenge for my wife and I. It will be an interesting challenge and an opportunity both to see how willing we are to change behaviors and also to identify those behaviors that are the tipping points in our household becoming electricity sustainable.


----------



## begreen (Oct 21, 2013)

Conservation and frugality out of respect for this incredibly special home we call earth is a good start. We unnecessarily waste so much. It wouldn't take that much to bring about significant change. 3D printing techniques can reduce waste to a small fraction of current machining techniques. Our homes are mostly leaky sieves, yet sloppy, excessive and wasteful construction continues with only small changes. Without recognizing the resources on our planet are finite and that our activities are all linked to the well being of our home we will continue to crap in our bed and pay the consequences for deferring on wise action. 

I like Sagan's parting thoughts on this pale blue dot.


----------



## semipro (Oct 21, 2013)

begreen said:


> 3D printing techniques can reduce waste to a small fraction of current machining techniques


Apparently even metal objects can be made with 3D printing now.  
This video featuring Elon Musk shows Iron Man style 3D design and 3D metal printing with sprayed metal particles and a laser.


----------



## begreen (Oct 21, 2013)

3D printing is getting very sophisticated. It can eliminate up to 80% of machining waste in many assemblies. It also may start solving interesting materials problems from oceans to space to medicine.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ptc/201...f-restores-marine-life-in-the-persian-gulf-3/
http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/15/european-space-agency-3d-printing-metal/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2013/10/15/3d-printing-revolutionizes-the-hearing-aid-business/


----------



## jebatty (Oct 24, 2013)

A couple posts above I presented the thought that "a sustainable economy can only be achieved by conservation efforts plus behavioral change far beyond what most of us now are willing to do or pay for, and therefore a sustainable economy is much more a matter of will than technology."

Regarding behavioral change, in our household the big energy hogs that are difficult to deal with are the electric dryer and the basement dehumidifer; then the electric cook stove/oven, and next the electric heat we need in our basement (contains two sleeping/living areas for visiting family) to make it livable during the winter. My wife tried drying clothes outside and bird poop that stained clothes plus the stiffness of air-dried clothes, moved the drying back to the electric dryer. Any solutions to these that might cause her to give air drying another chance?

I'm stuck in trying to deal with dehumidification. Not dehumidifying results in dampness and mold. Any ideas here?

My strategy on reducing energy use with the electric cook stove/oven is to go on a diet. LOL. We use a slow cooker some; what about a thermal cooker? Other ideas?

As to the basement, we keep it at about 50F; but with family guests we need to boost the heat. Heat is electric baseboard + a 240V electric wall heater. I thought about a heat pump, but we have no practical use for the resulting cool that is generated - refrigeration would be great if we really could use it. Would a heat pump still make sense? Other ideas?


----------



## Ehouse (Oct 24, 2013)

I think this came up on another thread but I keep thinking about finding a way to feed the dryer exhaust to a heat pump water heater.  that would solve a lot of problems at once.  

Do you have space for indoor air drying?  How about under a porch overhang?

I'm looking for a good sized oval roaster oven.  Why heat the whole range oven for a small roast or bird?

Introduce a little propane into the system.  A small DV gas stove would be great for the basement.


----------



## jebatty (Oct 24, 2013)

Indoor, maybe; porch is a possibility. Propane doesn't do it for us. We get an interrupt rate on the electric for heating which, cost-wise, is less expensive than propane. Similar for dhw heating, bill is only about $4.50/month, and a heat-pump idea is good but cost-wise is really high. This doesn't mean that I don't want to reduce usage. Usage is more than the cost I pay, it also has large social and environmental impacts which I am seeking to avoid or reduce.


----------



## Grisu (Oct 24, 2013)

jebatty said:


> A couple posts above I presented the thought that "a sustainable economy can only be achieved by conservation efforts plus behavioral change far beyond what most of us now are willing to do or pay for, and therefore a sustainable economy is much more a matter of will than technology."
> 
> Regarding behavioral change, in our household the big energy hogs that are difficult to deal with are the electric dryer and the basement dehumidifer; then the electric cook stove/oven, and next the electric heat we need in our basement (contains two sleeping/living areas for visiting family) to make it livable during the winter. My wife tried drying clothes outside and bird poop that stained clothes plus the stiffness of air-dried clothes, moved the drying back to the electric dryer. Any solutions to these that might cause her to give air drying another chance?



We dry our cloth outside regularly but never had a problem with bird poop. Maybe you can put up some shiny objects close to it that move in the wind to scare away the birds?
The stiffness is not something we really care about other than maybe towels. For those, you can take them off after a few hours of outside drying and put them in the dryer for finishing them up.



> I'm stuck in trying to deal with dehumidification. Not dehumidifying results in dampness and mold. Any ideas here?



There are plenty of guides on the internet how to improve humid basements. Have you checked them out?



> My strategy on reducing energy use with the electric cook stove/oven is to go on a diet. LOL. We use a slow cooker some; what about a thermal cooker? Other ideas?



Turn off the burners 5 min before the end for most dishes; the remaining heat will do the rest. An oven can be turned off easily 10 min early.
Use the microwave where possible.
When boiling on the stove use lids, that saves up to 30% in energy! Pots and pans with glass lids are helpful.
If you boil water regularly (tea, coffee, pasta etc) think about getting an express water heater. They use quite a bit less energy and are faster. Plus, you can more easily measure and heat up only the amount of water needed than in a kettle.



> As to the basement, we keep it at about 50F; but with family guests we need to boost the heat. Heat is electric baseboard + a 240V electric wall heater. I thought about a heat pump, but we have no practical use for the resulting cool that is generated - refrigeration would be great if we really could use it. Would a heat pump still make sense? Other ideas?



Dunno about the heat pump but if you use your basement so infrequently electric may be your best choice. It is essentially 100% efficient at your end, maybe 40% overall. Thus, maybe think about some solar panels instead as a better investment. How well is your basement insulated?


----------



## woodgeek (Oct 24, 2013)

do you have a HE washer with a high speed spin?  They get things so dry air drying in the house is much more practical, or the dryer run time is much shorter.  They use less H2O and kWh too.  I got an LG one for $600, that I figure saves me at least $200 in energy and water per year.


----------



## Ehouse (Oct 24, 2013)

woodgeek said:


> do you have a HE washer with a high speed spin?  They get things so dry air drying in the house is much more practical, or the dryer run time is much shorter.  They use less H2O and kWh too.  I got an LG one for $600, that I figure saves me at least $200 in energy and water per year.



For indoor drying there's lots of contraptions from lines to racks and beach umbrella types.  I just took down an antique wall mounted finger fan rack from my parents old house.


----------



## Where2 (Oct 24, 2013)

The beauty of what Jebatty is trying to accomplish is that everything he has described is electric driven. If only there were some way to take something free like sunshine and make electricity from it. Oh wait, I just read Jebatty's 6.5kW PV thread... Add another 2.5kW and forget about the cost of running the electric dryer.


----------



## jebatty (Oct 25, 2013)

> There are plenty of guides on the internet how to improve humid basements.


1) Dehumidifier - use that from about late June to earlly September.
2) Clothes dryer is not in and does not vent through the basement.
3) No a/c in the basement or other moisture producing appliances.
4) Opening the door and circulating air in the basement has the effect of adding more humidity; basement walls and floor are cool, outside warm air brings in moisture.
5) No water leaks in foundation or floor.
6) Gutters all drain well away from the house.
7) Ground mostly slopes away from the house and one wall where it doesn't, the ground is level.
8) No cooking in the basement.

A good suggestion follows from the most obvious - "If only there were some way to take something free like sunshine and make electricity from it. Oh wait, I just read Jebatty's 6.5kW PV thread..." With the solar electric, I also may be able to forget about the cost of running the dehumidifier.


----------



## woodgeek (Oct 25, 2013)

Doesn't add up Jim. Usually, if not water, you have outside humid air leaking into the basement and cooling it.  The only sol'ns are to airseal the rim/sill, utility openings, basement windows, etc. the source, or if you ran central AC to tie it into the basement. 

Ok, I guess you're saying that you don't AC the upstairs, and the RH upstairs is high enough to make a problem downstairs.  Hmmm.  You might consider running an AC upstairs, rather than a dehum downstairs.  Might work out to be less energy and keep you more comfortable.


----------



## Where2 (Oct 25, 2013)

jebatty said:


> 3) No a/c in the basement or other moisture producing appliances.



Technically, an A/C is not a moisture producing appliance. Chilling the air tends to condense excess moisture on the A/C coils and if the air handler and drain system are functioning properly, it removes moisture from the conditioned space. At least, that's the theory we use down here in the swamp where it is far too humid to use a swamp cooler to cool us off. (swamp coolers do introduce moisture into their conditioned space. Definitely don't want that in your basement).


----------

