We finished our first “high performance” home in 2019. It is at Evans Farm in Lewis Center, Ohio. We live there now. By high performance, we mean low energy consumption, not off-grid. Our first house still costs about $750 per year for its electric utility power, which accounts for about half of the power we use (all-electric, we really cannot use gas, oil, coal, and wood anymore). The remainder comes from solar panels on our garage. Key factors that make this possible are a tight Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) envelope, triple glazed windows, efficient HVAC, efficient electrical appliances, and LED lighting, Our Tesla Model 3 costs about $250 to run for a year, for about 10,000 miles. So, total cash to the utility is about $1,000 per year (1)
Our good experience with our home encouraged us to build another home for sale as a way to push this better technology out into our community where people could see it and learn about it. We started that second house, a 3 bedroom ranch with basement, early in 2021 and finished it in October.. It sold before it was done. The November electric bill (house is all-electric) was $97. That is right on target. Summer 2022 should see some negative bills.
We learned many things about home building on the second house project, and chief among those was that it is possible to build high quality, efficient homes for not much more than conventional timber-framed structures. Yes, it will cost a bit more. Perhaps 5% more, but we really can’t afford not to spend that 5% given the environmental crisis we are presently experiencing. That money will come back to the occupants quickly, very likely making the slightly higher mortgage payment and utilities combined even lower overall. Every new home should be a high-performance home.
I have been an Apple fan for many years. Most recently using a lovely MacBook Air (M1), a beautiful blue iPhone 12, and an iPad Air. But no more. This post was written on my Dell 3080 micro desktop running Linux Mint. My new Android Pixel 6 is lying by its side (12/12/2021).
I’ve stripped all communications software, contacts, and photographs from my iPad, and use it only for media playback and browsing. The MacBook and the iPhone are gone. Making this move was a difficult decision because the finely crafted Apple stuff worked really well and worked really well together, automatically. That’s not always the case in the Linux or cross-platform worlds. It took days to get calendar syncing working between Apple (family members), Android, and Linux devices, and to do that I ultimately had to move all my calendars to a third party cross-platform system, Cozi, which works very well.
There is a lot more “grit” in my new setup and a lot less “honey”. But, in the IT world grit can be good. By that I mean that there are defined open interoperability standards governing exchanges between functional apps. Those standards increase our security and privacy. We get addicted to information technology “honey”, you know. We forget about what we are giving up to get the smooth, sweet interoperability that comes with broad closed systems like Apple’s. Or Google’s. Or Microsoft’s. Tight integration through webs of almost impenetrable code can create security and privacy problems. It can hide things. It is complicated and exclusionary. Interoperability should come through open standards.
So what happened to make me go to all this trouble and expense? Not just the grit vs honey thing. My concerns began to rise with Jeffrey Paul’s November 2020 blog article, “Your Computer Isn’t Yours” (1). Apple’s honey pot was starting to overflow. It was becoming clear that my Mac really wasn’t my Mac anymore. It was increasingly just a hardware device connected to Apple’s iThing universe. I was losing control as to what software ran on it.
Then, in 2021, Apple announced decision to install a CSAM (child sexual abuse material) scanner on Apple devices (2, 3, 4, 5). Now, there is no CSAM on any device I own, so this was not a practical concern for me, and I didn’t care much what they did in THEIR iCloud because I could always (and did) encrypt important stuff (not CSAM) with my own tools before I put it there. But, philosophically, I cared a lot what they did to MY computers. A line had been crossed.
I also cared about the practical safety and even the lives of Apple device users who live under repressive regimes like those in Russia, Belarus, Syria, Iran, China, and even Texas (with its new take on Red Guard-like vigilantes) or Florida (with the Governor’s proposed new private volunteer army) (5). That’s the hot-flowing-blood-real problem. What happens when one of these governments says to Tim Cook, “You already look for CSAM, it should not be difficult to find who is saying bad things about our glorious leader. Here is a new law requiring you to do that.” Well, we already know the answer to that question because, for all practical purposes (China’s requirement for government controlled local servers), it has happened (6).
What might nation-state hackers do with Apple’s new “backdoor” code? We don’t know, but Apple is on a steep slippery slope and I choose to let them take the slide by themselves. I’ll not help them make a big mistake, and I’ll accept the pain required find new ways to get things done even if they are not quite so pretty. I’ll gain standards grit while I’m at it. Grit that can protect me from lazy information systems practices and the security and privacy weaknesses that come come with them.
So, the iPhone had to go. I chose my new Pixel 6 Pro phone because Android is more open to scrutiny than IOS. I don’t know that there is no “big brother” scanning going on on this device, but I find no evidence to suggest that there is. Certainly not an open admission. I chose to use Linux Mint Cinnamon on a Dell Optiplex 3080 micro-desktop that replaced my MacBook Air M1 (8) because Linux is as open as presently possible, and Linux Mint Cinnamon is about as refined as Linux comes (a lot like Windows XP). My existing ARM Pinebook Pro laptop (9) fills in for the Air when I have to be on the move. I use Manjaro/KDE Linux on the Pinebook.
There are thousands of eyes pouring over Linux Mint and Manjaro code every day. I have virtually total control of data management with a high degree of trust under these operating systems. It’s taken me a week to make the switch, mostly time required for moving and cleaning up data, and while there is more to do, I think I’m fairly well settled in. Linux Mint has come a long way since I last saw it. It found my Brother printer/scanner all by itself, just like Windows, and both functions work perfectly out of the box. Signal serves as my cross-platform messenger. Thunderbird does the mail. LibreOffice is all I need for writing, spreadsheets, presntations, and the like.
Today, even though I may have to shift gears manually sometimes, I have really good control of MY machines. Not the other way around. iPrivacy.
I have been watching Tesla’s Plaid release video’s for the last few days (6/12/2021). They were hard to miss, really very interesting, and I’m fine with what I’ve seen, in context. I own a Tesla Model 3 Dual Motor LR. Love it. But, we really don’t need many Plaid Model S cars, and, fact is, we won’t get many. I’ll never have one.
The Plaid Model S is a magnificent technology development project for Tesla. Good for business. Importantly, it projects leadership and power. It is a poster child (1), and that’s its context. However, in service the Plaid S is just a 390 mile range toy that gets to 60 mph in about 2 seconds. It is very expensive, and for that reason alone cannot urgently and directly help us solve our number one contemporary human survival problem, global warming.
Climate-wise, we need practical long-range carbon-free vehicles that we can afford to buy. Sadly, they are not here yet. But, there is hope.
Oddly enough, there was a fledgling company called Aptera Motors (2) putting on a show at about the same time as Tesla’s Plaid reveal. I suspect very few people watched Aptera’s webinar. Their car, the 1000 mile range (show me) Sol (current alpha version name), is a total departure from contemporary automotive design. The minimalist Sol could bring costs down to where common folk can participate in the greening of private transportation, even if it takes a lethargic 3.5 seconds to get to 60 mph. My Model 3, by the way, takes about 1 second longer, and it can be quite scary.
I’ve placed my deposit on a Sol-like production car, and hope I live long enough to complete the purchase. Aptera plans to start production this year, maybe next. We’ll see. The general simplicity of the vehicle and its composite fuselage may make that possible, may make it possible to avoid Elon Musk’s Model 3 manufacturing hell.
But, one thing for certain, while I am sure the Plaid is an absolute blast to drive, it cannot help solve the big problem. It’s at the wrong end of the solution spectrum. Aptera is at the correct end, maybe too close to the end for some, but at the correct end.
It had to happen, of course, and I have no problem with it. That is, those of us who drive electric cars have not been paying for road use. While that might have been be OK for a while to stimulate electric car development, it was not sustainable – particularly with all these new Teslas whispering around. Gotta fill those pot-holes and prop up those bridges. Ohio now requires a surcharge of $200 per year to register an electric car. We just paid ours. Other states are beginning to do this, as well, but the Ohio surcharge is at the top of the range. (1) So, I wondered how our car compared with gas cars under this new scheme.
Here is what I found:
For a normal year, Ohio seems to have a fair scheme, and contrary to some complaints I had heard and read, (2)(3) electric cars are not costing more in road taxes than gas and oil burners. Tax-wise in Ohio we’ll still be about $130 a year cheaper on average. It seems to me that this scheme must be much easier and cheaper to administrate than the gas pump tax method. So maybe it’s a win-win. (4)
And, let’s not forget that electric cars are, first — cheaper to run quite apart from the tax issue (which really isn’t an issue) and, second — an essential part of solving the climate crisis. We really have no choice.
I was walking in the neighborhood yesterday (04/03/2020) and it struck me how bright and clear the sky suddenly was. Of course, that’s because people have been driving much less. (1) We are staying close to home as a result of COVID-19 travel restrictions.
There is a teaching moment here, and that is that we have been dumping easily noticeable amounts of fossil fuel junk into our atmosphere for 100 years or so, and it’s piling up. A lot of that dull brown cast on the horizon we are used to seeing comes out of car tail-pipes, and it’s pretty well dispersed right now here in Lewis Center, Ohio. Just think how much better things will be when we are all driving renewable sourced electric cars, and the planet has had some time to cleanse its lungs.
Though they complain, car makers can meet the 2025 CAFE numbers. Hyundai, Kia, Mazda, and Toyota can pretty much do it today. But, the real answer is not better fossil fuel economy, it’s electrification. Maybe we should just stop all combustion engine car manufacturing in 2025, instead. It’s not a new idea. (3)
We ran across an interesting article on Remodelista’s site this morning (03/06/2020). (1) It’s a getaway house that uses much of the same Structural Insulated Panel System technology our Legacy House employs. The design is very Scandi, and that simplicity can be used to help control costs where it is appropriate.
On Thursday, February 13th, 2020, AEP (American Electric Power)and Efficiency Crafted Homes held their annual awards ceremony in Columbus, Ohio. Our builder, Dan Troth, on the right above, of GreenTech Construction (1) had the honor of taking home four awards from AEP. The one we were most interested in was for our house, Lowest HERS Score Including Renewables, (solar panels, in our case) with a HERS Score of 16. Lower is better, 100 is typical of a standard new home.
Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin told Greta Thunberg to get an economics degree before advising others as to how to deal with energy policy. (1) In doing that, Mnuchin demonstrates his total lack of understanding of the interplay of energy policy and our climate crisis. The fact is that the climate crisis is not an economic problem unless you are invested in fossil fuels and don’t care what damage you cause or who you kill to make your buck. The climate crisis is a survival problem, a breathing problem, a thirst problem, a hunger problem, a fire problem, an immigration problem, yes, but not an economic problem in the sense that we have any choice about spending boatloads of money to get it under control. Even so, you’ll find more than one real economist (not Steve) who will tell you that the technology and industrial effort required to save our planet through something like a “Green New Deal” is really a remarkable economic opportunity. (2) Would I rather dig coal or build hydro plants and install solar panels?
We are starting to build another small Zero Energy Ready house in our community with the builder of our present home. We’ll sell it, and try to build another after that. Maybe one each year if we do not lose our shirts along the line. That’s doing something that is visible on the street, something neighbors will talk about. We never planned to become home-builders, but it is something we can do, indeed, must do.
There is a list of 10 simple things we can all do at ThoughtCo. (3) You can visit the site to get the story on each item.
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
Use Less Heat and Air Conditioning
Change a Light Bulb
Drive Less and Drive Smart
Buy Energy-Efficient Products
Use Less Hot Water
Use the “Off” Switch
Plant a Tree
Get a Report Card from Your Utility Company
Encourage Others to Conserve
Even if these are small things in themselves, they help create the awareness and the culture we need, they add up, and you don’t need an economics degree to get them done.
A few days ago (12/18/2019) I dug up some of the old global temperature files from a simple personal study I ran in 1987 and added data from 1988 to 2013. Even way back then in 1987 (and long before (1)), it was obvious that people were doing something to change the climate. That’s not surprising considering that we live in a thin haze much like a balloon’s skin, the chemistry of which we are changing with highly inefficient combustion engines, and into which we leak and dump gaseous waste.
Below, you’ll see a scatter chart of annual average temperatures in Buenos Aires from 1856 to 2016. Argentina has really good historical data.
Two things are clear to me. The first is that temperatures are rising. Temperatures are up over 2 degrees C since the mid 19th century. The second is that there is less variation from year to year starting in the 1940s or so. I don’t know what this means, but wonder if it has something to do with adding energy to a medium that really does not want to accept it. A form of thermal compressibility factor? Will we reach a point where something “snaps”? Or, maybe the instruments are better from the 1940s onward. Don’t know.
I have not included a lot of other information I collected in 1987. That included sunspot and UV radiation data that showed absolutely no correlation to temperature variations in Buenos Aires or anywhere else I looked. The sun is not causing the climate changes we are seeing now.
We had a little Christmas party this week (12/12/2019) at several of the model homes in our new New Urbanist community. We walked from home to home, engaged with the builders, our neighbors, potential new neighbors, ate a few cookies, and drank a little ale. A good time was had by all.
At one of the homes, the builder asked some questions about our high performance home. In the course of that discussion, he raised four objections to American actions to reduce carbon emissions through technologies like solar panels and electric cars. Those points were:
It costs more in carbon emissions to build an electric car than driving the car will ever save over a gas car.
We shouldn’t have to worry about the environment because India and China are not abating their emissions.
We will never see electric “Boeing 737s”.
Power companies cannot maintain the grid with consumers generating part of their own energy.
Point 1. This sounds like a propaganda claim that is passed around without much thought. Facts will certainly not be found to back it up. The claim may have its tenuous roots in a 2017 Swedish study that raised serious concerns about the CO2 emissions related to electric car battery production (among other factors). That study was revised in 2019 to reflect the impact of improved production efficiencies at high volumes and the use of renewable energy in the manufacturing process. Check out the roofs of Tesla factories. (1) The revised study can be found at Scribd. (2) The 2019 CO2 estimate is about half of the 2017 study number. Importantly, the Swedish reports of 2017 and 2019 do not actually compare gas and electric car emissions, so the numbers must be used with great care and in context.
However, according to Mike Barnard, Executive Consultant, Energy and Cloud at IBM, (3) the CO2 cost of building an electric car is “. . . trivial compared to the emissions avoided due to not burning fossil fuels to move the car . . .” And, that is including the possibility that the electricity is derived from coal. This may have something to do with the fact that a combustion engine is only about 25% efficient, whereas an electric motor is nearly 100% efficient.
A better source of factual information about the emissions of electric cars is “Cleaner Cars from Cradle to Grave” (4) by the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the source of data for Mr. Barnard’s triviality comment, above.
Point 2: We did not forgo building our high-performance home because of China’s or India’s environmental policies. Certainly not because of Trumpian EPA policies. In a proverbial sense, we do not act as fools because our neighbors are fools, although it should be noted that both China and India are working very hard to correct their problems. We built our little house because we can see the what is happening in the world around us. We let the facts be our guide. When we lack leadership, we must assume the mantle ourselves, and we did.
Point 3. We may not see electric 737s in our lifetimes. I won’t argue that we will, but I will argue that we absolutely shall be required to reduce our use of jet transport aircraft and to change our lifestyles as we accommodate that reduction. That’s the real point here. Our environment cannot continue to accept today’s levels of emissions from the non-essential jet transportation of bananas and lobsters or next-day deliveries of crockpots.
Point 4. Power companies do have a problem with local generation of power, although it is not so much the economics of the basic grid infrastructure. Solar and wind can cause rapidly fluctuating demand that is difficult to manage. Difficult, not impossible. Difficult because our present electric grid was not designed to work with these newer distributed generation technologies. The real problem with today’s slow and steady highly centralized grid is its lack of quick response storage, and the answer to this problem is not to protect the past through legislation to penalize distributed solar and wind generation, but to encourage change and adaptation through legislation in a joint government/industry effort to redesign our power infrastructure for an inevitable coal and gas free future where energy comes from a variety of distributed and nearly autonomous sources. A good read on this topic is “The Grid: Electrical Infrastructure for a New Era” by Gretchen Bakke.
