Showing posts with label lighting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lighting. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Willowside Rd., Day 29

Yesterday, John Doe called and said he was ready to discuss options.  Great.

This morning, Daniel from Zero Energy Associates and I sat down at their dining room.  John had examined how much the Sonoma County Energy Independence Program (SCEIP) would finance. SCEIP has a couple of limitations – not over x% of Loan to Value, or .  The limit SCEIP would finance on his property, less the cost of his proposed solar electric system, was $20,000.  Since I'd already modeled the proposed improvements we were considering to his home in EnergyPro and found a possible 50% improvement, I knew the Energy Upgrade California (EUC) program would send him a rebate of at least $3500 so his real total that he could spend on energy improvements was more like $23,500.  OK.  That was my target.  Now how much could I fit in that amount?  That's basically the question he asked me to answer.

Let's see, the definite items are:

Air sealing walls and ceiling, doors and weatherstripping:  $1600
Replacing the 9 recessed fixtures in the kitchen w/ ICAT  CFLs:  $900
Tidy up the R19 attic insulation and blow more to end up with R38:  $3000
Replace FAU with 95% direct vent unit with all new ductwork:  $9900
Replace AC heat pump with SEER 15 unit:  $3700
Test in, test out, SCEIP paperwork, EUC application:  $1400
Weatherstripping and properly venting the DHW closet:  $450
Repairing the floor where existing floor registers are removed:  $1200

Total:  $22000

OK, there's $1500  left.  Here's the options:

Air seal the subfloor from the crawlspace:  $400
Insulate the floor with batts to R19 (joists 48”OC):  $4000
Insulate the floor with closed cell foam to R10 (less $400 because I don't have to air seal the subfloor:  $6900
Replace the water heater with a 95% direct vent:  $4200
Move the washer/dryer into the garage:  $1500-2000
Ditch, drain, sump pump, and vapor seal the crawlspace & monitor:  $TBA

If he chooses to insulate the floor with batts, I will have to air seal the subfloor; the upcharge to use spray foam under the subfloor is 6900 less 4000 or $2900.  If he chooses to replace the DHW, I don’t have to do as much work on the closet so the DHW is 4200 less 200 or $4000.

If John is willing to go a bit over his $23,500 limit, which do YOU think is the best choice, considering both energy savings and indoor comfort?

Monday, May 2, 2011

Willowside Project, Day 17

Zero Energy Associates has finished their bid for the HVAC and DHW systems, both of which really should be replaced with direct vented appliances so we can seal up the closet doors and don't have to worry about combustion byproducts in the interior air.  Daniel and I are at John and Jane Doe's today to deliver their audit report and answer all questions.

Once again, they show themselves to be ideal clients.  They ask a lot of informed questions that show they're not only listening, but thinking over what we're talking about and applying it to their vision of what they want.  Since they're so engaged, the talk and report delivery take 2 hours and I stay another 45 minutes after Daniel leaves to talk about lighting options and other livability issues with their home.

Part of the lighting discussion revolves around the recessed ceiling cans in their kitchen which, besides being non ICAT and not giving any general lighting, are far enough away from the upper cabinets that a person working on a counter has their hands in the shadow cast by their head; an all to common occurrence and one that is just plain bad design.  We'll try a new trim ring on one first to see if scattering the light with a fresnel lens creates enough ambient light and then undercabinet lights takes care of the task lighting.

Besides all the talk about HVAC and DHW changes, we talk about the reasons for an all new, balanced, duct system, whether to move their washer/dryer out into the garage (their's always pros and cons), and whether the patio doors in the dining room are worth keeping, adjusting, and replacing the weatherstripping or whether it's better to just replace them.  All goes well and as part of the lighting discussion, I learnt that the lights in their range hood don't work; looks like the switch is broken/worn out, so I take the whole control unit home with me to fix it for them.  Easy for me to do and well worth the effort.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Let there be light. And let it be from LEDs.

The following link takes you to one of my favorite blogs.  And this one has a few thought provoking nuggets.  Each one of us can make a difference, however small, that our grandchildren will thank us for.  I want to leave as good a world as I can for them and this blogpost talks about one way.

Let there be light. And let it be from LEDs.

Is Europe ahead of us?

I just returned from a wonderful vacation to France: 4 days in Paris and a week or so in rural southern France, in the Pyrenees.  The French are so French and the buildings aren't considered old unless they were built before the 1400s.  Fascinating history that dates back millenia, though occasionally rather bloody.  And while my lovely wife and I were soaking up the history and culture, I was also taking in how they used energy - how they modernized and heated all the old stone buildings, what their energy package was (electricity production, natural gas for heating, etc.), and their cultural beliefs around indoor comfort, personal space, and expectations.  Luckily, she was tolerant of my constant musings on buildings and energy use.

I expected and was familiar with Europe's smaller, more efficient vehicle size, excellent public transit system, higher percentage of scooter use, and the fact that walking is so much more a part of life than in the States, even in rural areas.  Transportation issues in the cities, and even interurban, are a whole topic in themselves and I won't go in to them here.  But the first thing that struck me as different and unusual inside a building was as soon as we got to our first hotel in Paris.  We tended to stay in what I'll call low-end-fancy or high-end-budget.  Michelin two and three stars but the cheapest of them.  As we walked in to the hall on our floor, it was initially dark but the lights turned on the moment we turned the corner, dim but adequate - aha, they're on motion detectors and turn off after a few minutes.  A little strange for us because the area is dark until you approach it but very effective as far as energy usage.  Then we enter our room and there is no light in the room until one sticks the key card in to a slot on the wall that turns on all the electricity in the room.  This was so common and expected there that they didn't even tell us about it at the front desk.  Granted, I've seen it in a few hotels in the States but it's still relatively rare but I suspect saves a LOT of energy.  No more lighting unoccupied rooms or endlessly droning room heaters.  Then we turn on the lights and find that they're CFLs in the ceiling and LEDs on either side of the bed.  LEDs, no less.  They're investing in LEDs on a public scale.  Small, excellent for reading at night, and probably draw less than 5 watts apiece.  There's more, but you get the picture: our carbon footprint while we were staying there was far less than the average hotel in the States (and yes, I'm making a point out of ignoring the huge carbon cost of our flight there and back - I'm still working on that area).

The other hotel we stayed at was similar, and what came to mind was a difference in cultural expectations.  The quality of life there is comfortable while the average person's energy footprint is considerably less than ours.  Hotels are actively investing in energy reducing technology: central boilers that not only provide the hot water but also feed individual, quiet water-to-air heaters in each room, either fan fed in a dropped ceiling or passive white radiators on the walls; modern LED directed lighting; services that are only available when needed, controlled by motion detectors or key card controllers.  These things cause a small amount of bother.  The room isn't perfectly warm for us when we enter, it's dark until we approach an area, there's more task lighting and less area lighting.  And we're conditioned to expect to not be bothered by little niggly things like that.  But the net savings from those actually very small adjustments are substantial.

Which brings me back to expectations.  I didn't gain anything directly from having to make little adjustments to accommodate these energy saving features.  On the contrary, they cost me slightly according to my American expectations.  But they saved the country substantially as a whole.  This takes me back to my college philosophy class and the concept of The Commons: the area of our cultural life that we all have to share with each other.  Water, air, roads and transportation, public spaces, most things the government does for us.  We take care of The Commons even where it costs us some personally because it's better for all and in the end, that's better for us.  We all do it to some extent.  We pay taxes, we share the road, we recycle and try not to pollute.  In Europe, with it's much older, denser history of human occupation, they just have a bit more developed sense of The Commons than we do here in the States, with our sense of unlimited space and resources.

As our population grows and we strive to keep our standard of living while not destroying our environment, Europe has a few things to teach us about resource usage in our buildings.  And I haven't even gotten to the windmill farms, bullet trains, our plenty big turbo diesel rental car - full size for Europe - that got nearly 50 mpg in hilly, stop and go, and freeway driving while passing stringent air quality requirements and giving us standard amenities that most American cars don't even have as options.

Come on, America, we need to be on the *forefront* of energy efficiency, not lagging farther and farther behind.  Because the country that does more with less will end up leading.  And right now, that's not us.

Now how can I import that turbo diesel we drove there.  Mmmm....

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

LED residential lighting

2009 is the year I saw LEDs finally come down in price, up in lumens per watt, and with a broader selection of colors.  Enough so that they’ve become competitive with CFLs for the claim of the Greenest Light.  But luckily for us research is being done on manufacturer’s claims of light output and longevity, and unluckily for some manufacturers the research is showing that not all LEDs are being created equally.  In fact, the worst are so bad that their initial light output is a small fraction of what’s advertised and within a hundred hours of use their already small amount of light falls off to miniscule.  And that’s what I want to talk about here.

The EERE – Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, an arm of the Department of Energy – has enough of a budget to contract with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to put out a report from time to time called the CALiPER or, take a deep breath now, Commercially Available LED Product Evaluation and Reporting.  Say that three times fast.  Started in 2006, there have been 9 research reports or rounds in which various LED and CFL lamps and fixtures were bought on the open market and then put through their paces.  And if you’re nerdy enough to not be put to sleep by technical reading, you may find them fascinating.  I did which makes me a Certifiable Energy Nerd.
Available to the public, you can find the series at the EERE website and, though they’re all informative, the last few here and here are more so.  To sum up in a nutshell what was found, there are a LOT of brand X LEDs coming on the market of poor quality and the buyer, you, must beware.  But there’s also a few that are as good as or better than their claims.  How are we to know?  The reports describe the LEDs that were tested but for some reason (if you know why let me know) they don’t give the Brand names.  Small pictures of each product are included so you can make a vague guess as to what brand they are and apparently they tend to be the ones sold at the big box stores.  The cheap ones.
Other reports, available at Home Energy Magazine and here at the EERE (it's almost 4 years old - an eon in LED development - but still apropro), lay out the possibility that the increasing marketing of the low end LEDs to the public may cause a backlash similar to the ones CFLs experienced when they first came out.  I know I’m showing my age but I remember how poor the quality was of SOME of the early CFLs and how the failures of the cheap ones colored public perception of CFLs in general and set the CFL industry back a few years.  I suspect LEDs are in for a similar perception unless manufacturer honesty and federal oversight of the wild marketing claims keeps the poorest performers off the market.  But the major brands – Cree, Halo, and a few others – have fixtures that ARE competitive.

If your incandescent lamps are burning out or costing you an arm and half a leg to keep lit, or if you’re tired of your CFLs being so dim for the first minute they’re on and you want something better, LEDs are becoming Prime Time in 2010.  And when you're in the store looking them over, remember this label:

  
It's a voluntary Truth in Labeling program run by the Department of Energy.  Read about it here.  The major manufacturers who sign on to the above labeling alliance can't afford negative publicity and their products appear to be well designed and with actual quality control.  

I’m installing an increasing number of the new generation ICAT (insulation contact, air tight) LED modules and my customers are raving about them.  They come on quickly, have a high enough Color Rendering Index (CRI) that objects appear as they should at night, are now available in various color temperatures (see this article for why CRI and color temperature are important), they dim adequately with standard dimmers, and the cost of the recessed lighting fixtures are similar to CFLs.  Personally, I’m sold on the technology and it’s improving all the time.