Seattle is having a cold snap. It's 25 degrees outside. Our rare freezing winter days correspond with equally rare clear winter skies. Days like this make me wish I had a solar powered home that could harvest and store that free burst of energy for later use.
The bottom line is that American homes are just too large to be cost effectively heated with solar energy. The push has been to get the cost of solar panels down. But, what would you get if you crossed an expensive solar heating and cooling system with an optimally sized home? By optimal, I mean not larger than you need. You would get an affordable solar powered home like the one shown above (click here to see the details).
By affordable, I mean in the $150-200 thousand range excluding land, sewer, and water systems. Picture the north face with fancy wood and slate trim, a deck off of the loft doubling as a carport, double french doors, and lots and lots of windows (and window plugs). Essentially, this is a well insulated 10 x 40-foot park model trailer stocked with highly energy efficiency dual mode gas/electric appliances, and lots of diode lighting under a standardized solar energy system optimized for a given area of the country. Picture an entire neighborhood (or trailer park or commune) of these all facing south. Ninety percent of the people on this planet would jump at the chance to live in a home like that. Home size is relative, dependent on wealth and how far the "my house is bigger than yours" arms race has progressed. It's all a matter of perception.
The total cost would be low because the house would cost very little -- it is prefabricated and designed for optimal size and energy efficiency. Instead of a house that costs far more than its heating and cooling system, the heating and cooling system would cost far more than the house. Park model trailers are not what they used to be. Check out some of these interiors and hold on to your seat in case you get dizzy.
Like a Prius, the system pulls out all the engineering stops to maximize efficiency. And, like a Prius, it requires a computer program to optimize performance. Your (solid-state, low-power) home computer would have a screen showing exactly where all your energy is going, how dirty your PV panels are, how much heat is being lost to the night air, and anything else you can think of. You would be hyper aware of your energy use. You would also be able to change program parameters with a few mouse clicks, giving a higher priority on some days to charging the lithium batteries in your car, for example.
The computer would asses the system minute to minute, deciding how to best store the energy surplus and draw down stored energy. Several sunny days in Seattle might top off hot water and battery storage. Or the PVC panels might be diverted from hydrogen and battery charging to electric heating coils to help the solar trough and flat plate panels make hot water. A hole in the clouds might prompt the computer to shut down the hydrogen burning furnace and instead draw hot air from that part of the solar trough concentrator dedicated to hot air instead of water. It might draw on the batteries for heating the house if the hot water is low. It might burn hydrogen directly in a 95% efficient forced air furnace. Many appliances, like the stove, refrigerator, furnace, and dryer could be dual mode, capable of using gas or electricity.
An oversized system would sometimes top off all storage and sit idle while the sun beats down on it -- or it might send some power to a neighbor. This is how all power grids work. Let's say for example that this house is part of a closely spaced community of such houses (trailer park, neighborhood, commune) all hooked together into their own smart grid. There might even be a communal hydrogen tank farm. A less expensive, slightly undersized system would need to draw occasionally on a larger power grid when the sun stays hidden for months at a time, as can happen in Seattle.
This could all be done with off-the-shelf components. Hydrogen generators are available on the market today. Nothing new needs to be invented. If you lived in the Puget Sound area, your system might have been designed to optimize the size of the hydrogen storage tank and number of PVC panels to take advantage of the long sunny days of summer, harvesting and storing solar energy for the long dark winter. In Tucson, where the biggest problem is cooling dry air, the system might optimize battery storage to run your swamp cooler into the night and the hot water storage for heating on winter nights. You might have little need to produce and store hydrogen.
Maybe you could live in a small condo that costs only $20-$40 a month to heat and light. But not everyone wants to live in a condo.
What makes a bigger house more desirable? A bigger house isn't more comfortable. I know from experience, having lived for several years in an 8' x 30' park model trailer located in a very nice park adjacent to a bike trail and a mile from the University of Washington campus with my wife-to-be while she finished graduate school and I worked at Boeing. Talk about easy to clean. But what if hybrid solar homes eventually garner even greater status and resale values than McMansions? Big houses may become a liability in the future. You never know.
Can small living spaces be just as comfortable as large ones? Absolutely, if properly designed. The trailer we lived in had a large sliding glass door and big windows in the living room that let the light pour in. We had lots of hanging plants and even had our own garden plot. It was an extremely comfortable place for a young couple to live. Cozy best describes it.
The park was nicely landscaped and had a small outbuilding with a communal washer and dryer as well as an extra bathroom, which is the same arrangement we found at the 1.2 million dollar houseboat of similar size on Lake Union we recently checked on during an open house. The park was eventually sold to a developer and now has office buildings on it. I was forced to sell our cozy home (for the same $4,000 I paid for it) and eventually purchased the house we now live in using the money saved by living so frugally. We look back to those days with nostalgia. It is unlikely we would still be there had the park not been sold, but hey, you never know.
An elderly couple lived next door to us in a much larger trailer (10' x 40'). Trailer parks have their hierarchies like every other human group. They loved their small home and had raised two children in it. Essentially, they had traded working their asses off to impress other people with a big house for a life of leisure and an early retirement instead. What a concept!
We have friends who live in a nice home in San Diego. They recently purchased a trailer in a nice park as a stopover to cut a long commute to work in half. I think they may have paid a few hundred thousand dollars for it.
Trailer life not your cup of tea? The Moda Condos, which I believe are still under construction, are reasonable living spaces in downtown Seattle. The smaller units are less than 400 square feet and sold for less than $150,000. They sold out almost immediately, and I can see why. Drag your cursor over those links and check out the fixtures and trim they put in those things. Some of these condos will have only one of six sides exposed to the weather. I'll wager that the total heating and electric bill isn't much more than $20 a month.
Interestingly enough, many of these condos do not have parking spaces, which would have cost as much as $40,000. Is it true you can have a comfortable life and a low-carbon footprint?
I've been in several downtown condos this year. One was recently sold for three million dollars, commanded two floors and had two walls of solid glass, one of which was facing Elliot bay. The thermostats on the electric heaters didn't work so the owner controlled the heat by opening and closing windows! An elderly gentleman who recently passed away owned it. We can't take it with us.
The others were two-bedroom units of approximately five or six hundred square feet. The one with a view of Elliot bay cost $750,000. Views are an expensive option. They impress new visitors but not repeat visitors. I was just in that condo last week and have no recollection of having looked out the window. I would have been just as impressed with a large flat screen TV connected to a moveable zoom lens web camera mounted on a pole on the roof. Everyone could have a 360 view and telescope all in one package.
‘Heretic’ battles straw man
Gore on the Daily Show: extended dance remix
Comments
View as Threaded
wiscidea Posted 11:26 pm
21 Jan 2008
Federal or state subsidies for this sort of innovation -- though I think biodiversivist indicates it can all be done with existing technology -- would be a REAL economic stimulus package, support local economies, and great good jobs.
I recently learned we might be able to add a photovoltaic system to our existing house for about $10,000. I still have to look into whether it would be possible to use solar energy to heat the house... I doubt it... it is about 5 F right now. I hope biodiversivist futher develops the pre-fab optimize home, but would look forward to suggestions regarding how we might upgrade existing homes.
Regarding McMansions, I heard an economists saying that it will become very difficult to sell them when current owners retire. Young folks just don't have the income to buy such monstrosities and, having smaller families, really don't need them. Perhaps McMansions will eventually be divided into multi-family housing. Biodiversivist's house should retain its value, especially as energy prices rise, much longer than a McMansion.
Regarding "arms races", perhaps there is a way to employ social marketing to create a new "arms race" in which people compete for the right to brag about the lowest utility bill, maintenance costs for their home, or free time available to spend with their families.
Thanks.
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 2:39 am
22 Jan 2008
I think 1200 sq feet should be adequate for even a family of four (although my wife might disagree) -- I believe that was the average (or median?) size of a house in 1970 .
One question though: can you have a similar design for an apartment building? My thought is that, since you have much less roof space per person, an apartment building is much more efficient for heating and cooling -- plus you could have some economies of scale in terms of storage.
Permalink
Quinn Posted 2:40 am
22 Jan 2008
I am shocked that an alternative housing concept would employ this dangerous material.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 3:14 am
22 Jan 2008
"Attribute CLEAR for tag BR is not allowed" thanks to the a string of hyper text code that I can't post here in its entirety because it causes this post to fail as well!
br clear="all"
Hint to webmaster, or anyone who would like to help me edit this post...
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
rhythm510 Posted 3:19 am
22 Jan 2008
Slow down there, big fella!
In this article and subsequent comments, PVC is referring to photo-voltaic cells and not the poly(vinyl chloride) of which you are against.
Photo-voltaic cells convert sunlight into electrical current and are sometimes called solar cells or solar panels. I assume that the reason these posters decided to use the term PVC is to distinguish the solar cells used to make electricity from those used to heat water or air.
Hope this helps / makes some sense.
Permalink
GreenOx Posted 3:26 am
22 Jan 2008
In my home state of Kansas, we get over 200 days a year of sun. While the use of solar technologies would be a very beneficial option for heating and powering our homes, there is another (and often underappreciated) way: passive solar. By designing our homes to increase light/heat flow in the winter and decreasing those inputs in the summer, we can significantly decrease the demand for heating and cooling systems. Solar and PV on a home's roof provides very little positive benefit if that home is inefficient and requires far more than it could truly need - it would be like putting a band-aid on a severed limb. But, if solar and PV are utilized in conjunction with smaller homes that harness passive solar design - especially in sunny places like Kansas - we could make a much bigger impact on our emissions.
-GreenOx
http://www.greenox.blogspot.com
-GreenOx
http://www.greenox.blogspot.com
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 3:57 am
22 Jan 2008
I went house shopping yesterday, and I found exactly what you are describing -- but it was a Centex townhome in Kent Valley (at the base of 272nd). They are brand new, beautiful townhomes and they are selling for $230-$260,000.
They are two stories, somewhat narrow -- but the two stories have high ceilings and the open plan makes it seem like there's a ton of space!
Viva la Climate Resistance!
Permalink
Matt G Posted 4:00 am
22 Jan 2008
Permalink
David Roberts Posted 4:12 am
22 Jan 2008
Great post.
grist.org
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:20 am
22 Jan 2008
Reduce home power needs to 200 watts, with geo heat exchange and heat pump, and solar heat and conservation. Smaller home, more efficient appliances and devices will do that.
Maximize solar input with a large solar facing roof, incorporate a small wind system, and biogas digestor as backup. Design it to average 400 watts, with excess solar and wind electricity going back into the grid. That gives enough kwh to charge a plugin hybrid too.
By adjusting home size, earth sheltering, and roof size, this should be feasible just about anywhere.
Prefab too, that reduces cost. But an onsite custom built home using fiber cement with insulation built in might be cheap enough too. This allows for extensive earth berming because of the cement walls.
A prefab modular fiber cement home, slid off a trailer into the carefully prepared excavation. That has to be the best deal.
A far less expensive home means a much smaller amount of income goes to pay interest. Adding on later, if necessary is preferable. Buy another prefab section if/when more family members come along.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
John Kosmer Posted 10:39 pm
22 Jan 2008
John Kosmer
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:11 am
23 Jan 2008
It would eliminate most of the rest of your energy consumption. At 5000 per year savings the payback period would be acceptable. Especially with oil set to go higher and higher.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 6:22 am
23 Jan 2008
The hybrid solar home would release no CO2, have no electric or heating bills at all, and cost about 2/3 less.
On your south face I see a lot of windows. They have an R-value around 2.5. Your walls have an R-value of maybe 25. Your windows lose heat about ten times faster than your walls when the sun isn't shining on them, which is about 2/3 of the time. About half of that wall is made out of glass.
Half million dollar McMansions like that plopped in the middle of rural farmland are greenwashing no matter how you build them. Somebody is going to have to get in an SUV and drive to do anything. That home is 2.5 times bigger than my own two story home, which has a living room, guest/TV room, two full bathrooms, a study, a roomy kitchen and dining nook, a master bedroom that runs the full width of the house and two more bedrooms to boot. It seems unlikely that this 4000 square foot house could possibly be more comfortable.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Nucbuddy Posted 7:34 am
23 Jan 2008
How about commute to work?
...Or shop?
...Or watch a movie?
Permalink
spaceshaper Posted 11:09 am
23 Jan 2008
I'm a little dismayed too though by the diagram in the OP which appears to show the whole south elevation of the model homelet taken up by solar collectors with nary a sunny window to curl up in on a bright winter day. Small is good, no sunny window spots is baaad!
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:19 pm
23 Jan 2008
And it will insulate the windows when the sun is not shining. With this you woulsd not need roof mounted PV either, although they would be great on this home.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink