Edward Mazria’s Posts

• Are new nuclear plants the answer? No.

  Oh, those sexy building codes: More powerful than 100 nuclear plants 2

  Posted 3 months, 2 weeks ago

  All of the other emissions-reduction approaches in the House climate bill pale in comparison to what the building energy codes will accomplish. Without them, we simply cannot meet the greenhouse-gas emissions reduction targets called for in the bill. We won't even come close.

• 100 nuclear plants: The answer? 15

  Posted 3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Architecture 2030 is working on a better answer.

• A hog in a tuxedo is still a hog

  NAIOP releases disinformation study downplaying building efficiency 3

  Posted 8 months, 1 week ago

  I was wondering when it would happen: a building sector disinformation campaign launched by vested interests.

  Well it's here. The campaign hit the New York Times on Saturday, and it comes from NAIOP, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association. It appears just as the country has come to grips with the fact that buildings are responsible for over 50% (50.1% to be exact*) of all the energy consumed in the U.S. It comes at a time when Americans are trying to reshape their energy policy and… Read More

• Building stimulus on Capitol Hill

  2030 Challenge Stimulus Plan: Emission reductions, jobs, and economic benefits across the country 3

  Posted 10 months, 3 weeks ago

  President-elect Obama has committed to economic recovery, energy independence, carbon-neutral buildings by 2030, and an 80 percent reduction in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Architecture 2030 has developed a groundbreaking economic stimulus plan [PDF] that simultaneously addresses all of these issues, with a single investment. Kristina Kershner and I presented the 2030 Challenge Stimulus Plan to policymakers and industry leaders in the nation's capitol last week. It is gathering steam.

  The Plan takes a focused approach, strategically inserting scarce investment dollars into the economy to get the widest range… Read More

• Live, baby, live

  Architecture 2030's challenge targets would provide five times the energy as offshore and nuclear 31

  Posted 1 year ago

  Because America's energy crisis is adversely impacting our economy and national security, it is critical to take a realistic look at the energy solutions currently being proposed by politicians, industry, and the media.

  Architecture 2030 in its latest E-News Bulletin illustrates that the centerpiece of America's proposed "Bold Energy Plan," consisting of 45 new nuclear plants and offshore drilling, would supply a meager three percent of the 118 QBtu of energy that the Energy Information Administration projects America will consume in 2030. The other proposed… Read More

All Posts

Edward Mazria’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Many Strategies Available

  There are 3 other tiers of mortgage rate buy downs, 30% below and 50% below code and carbon neutral. Download the Plan for these. Not knowing your particular building or where you live I suggest the following. First the easy applications, overhangs on south windows, summer shading on west windows for lowering cooling bills, insulating window quilts for nightime insulation over glazing in cold climates. On  historic flat roof buildings in cold climates, you may be able to add skylights with skylids to turn them in heat gainers in winter and shaded and operable in summer for natural ventilation. Solar hot water is an add-on, cost effective, 30% tax credit from the Feds and other tax credits and incentives in many states. Photovoltaics is also an add-on with a 30% Fed tax credit, many states also have incentives. When the solar incentives are added to the mortgage rate buy down it becomes a positive cash flow investment. I'm sure there are many other strategies and products that can help you meet one of the targets.On 2030 Challenge Stimulus Plan: Emission reductions, jobs, and economic benefits across the country posted 10 months, 3 weeks ago 3 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Chart 2

  The US Electricity Consumption graph illustrates that 45 new nuclear plants (average 820 MW capacity) will produce 3 QBtu of primary energy consumption (delivered + losses) and 1 QBtu of delivered energy consumption (clearly illustrated in red on the graph). This equates to about 6% of total primary or delivered electricity consumption, 2.5% of total US primary energy consumption and 1.2% of total US delivered energy consumption. On Architecture 2030's challenge targets would provide five times the energy as offshore and nuclear posted 1 year ago 31 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Architecture 2030 response:

  1. The EIA estimates that 1 QBtu of delivered energy is equal to the delivered energy of thirty-seven to forty 1000 MW (capacity) nuclear plants (actual number depends on the year).

  2. There are 103 nuclear reactor units operating today in the US with an average unit capacity of 930 MW. Reactor units range from 476 MW to 1335 MW.

  3. As of June 30, 2008 there were a total of nine new commercial nuclear license applications under review for fifteen reactor units - ten at 1117 MW, two at 1400MW, one at 1520MW and one at 1600MW.  These applications were submitted before the current US credit crisis and economic meltdown.

  4. New nuclear reactor designs are now coming in all sizes from the the Toshiba 4S (10 to 50 MW capacity) to the Westinghouse PBMR (180 MW capacity), IRIS (360 MW), AP 600 (600 MW), AP 1000 (1100 MW) and AREVA NP EPR (1600 MW).

  5. A new report from Standard and Poor's this week (10/15/08), "Construction Costs To Soar For New US Nuclear Power Plants", states that any new nuclear reactor contracts are not expected to have a fixed timeline or overall fixed construction cost, making it impossible to estimate the actual cost of a reactor. The cost to build a reactor has risen 173 percent since 2000.

  6. The projected cost of building a new nuclear plant is staggering. From the Wall Street Journal May 12, 2008, "FPL Group, Juno Beach, Fla., estimates it will cost $6 billion to $9 billion to build each of two reactors (1100 MW each) at its Turkey Point nuclear site in southeast Florida. It has picked a reactor design by Westinghouse Electric Co., a unit of Toshiba Corp., after concluding it could cost as much as $12 billion to build plants with reactors designed by General Electric Co." This was the cost in May 2008 (before the economic meltdown and tight credit) and does not include land costs, cost of new transmission lines, support facilities, nuclear waste storage and decommissioning.  

  7. Because of the US economic meltdown, tight credit and escalating nuclear facility construction cost, Architecture 2030 believes that new nuclear plant construction will eventually be built in the mid-range of capacity (if at all). Therefore, we used an average nuclear unit capacity of 820 MW to create the graph for US Electricity Consumption.

  8. Even if one assumes an average new unit capacity of 1100 MW to create the graph, the total energy, i.e. primary energy (delivered energy plus losses), would be between 3.75 QBtu and 4.0 QBtu. (The delivered energy would be between 1.25 QBtu and 1.32 QBtu.) This is still a drop in the bucket compared to the 118 QBtu of total (primary) energy (85 QBtu delivered) that the EIA projects the US will consume in the year 2030.

  9. The estimate of maximum production (in the year 2030) for offshore drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf comes from the US Energy Information Administration.  
     
  On Architecture 2030's challenge targets would provide five times the energy as offshore and nuclear posted 1 year ago 31 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Question

  A question. Was the debate about climate change and the number of hurricanes, or climate change and hurricane intensity and water content, or both? On Revisiting the climate-science funding question posted 1 year, 9 months ago 48 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Ice Loss

  From the same NY times article, seems you forgot to mention:

  Thomas Wagner, a German scientist at Newcastle University in England who was among the authors, cautioned against concluding that modern ice in the Arctic or Antarctic might resist current global warming.

  Or to add the latest article at (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008 ...): Escalating Ice Loss Found in Antarctica
  On There is a silver-bullet solution to global warming posted 1 year, 9 months ago 8 Responses