A Blog by WARM Training Center
Jacob
This user hasn't shared any biographical information
Homepage: http://www.warmtraining.org
Posts by Jacob
Don’t miss Mission Zero Fest
May 8th
Don’t miss this great event featuring all the greatest things happening on the front edge of energy at Mission Zero Fest. We need volunteers to help with green home tours, info tables, working on zero waste for the event, etc. www.missionzerofest.org
This is the second year this great event has happened, and now there’s food and amazing music! WARM’s happy to be a part of it – and you should be too!
Sign up to help for a few hours:
What’s the weather mean?
Apr 17th
Is this past winter’s warmth indicative of climate change? Well, yes and no. Check out this great article looking at the data behind the recent heat shift. Their overall conclusion: the amount of variation is similar to past weather patterns, but the overall temperatures within those variations are higher than usual. So the heat wave itself is not so shocking as it might seem — but it does appear warmer than previously and indicates that we might see more of these extreme variations than we used to.
The first thing to remember is that weather is very different from climate. Weather is the local, current variation that happens, whereas climate is the large overall pattern and trend for an area. Weather can vary widely and dramatically without that meaning anything about the overall climate of an area. In other words, one REALLY cold month, doesn’t mean the weather is changing. We’ve talked about this a bit before during the Tornado spat last year.
When we experience a week of really strange weather, that alone doesn’t tell us anything about potential climate shifts. However, if the climate were under threat of shifting, we would see more extreme, varied and unpredictable weather patterns more frequently. One weird weather event doesn’t tell us much, but many weird weather events is definitely suggestive of impending climate shifts
Watch the window-hype
Mar 22nd
Don’t believe all the hype you see on TV about the energy improvements of windows. While some cases will see a significant improvement from window upgrades (and high efficiency windows should always be used when you’re building new or replacing the windows for other reasons), we see many people tackle windows as an energy improvement when they should be focusing on improved insulation, air sealing or furnace upgrades.
Today, I received this email from former WARM Training Center energy educator Mike Cohn who lays out some great critical analysis of some window hype he saw on TV. The main message: Be Informed. Take it away, Mike….
People ask about energy efficient products seen on tv shows like HGTV’s Curb Appeal “An exterior featuring environmentally friendly design” (2009, but in reruns)
I recently wrote to the network (and encourage you to do the same when you spot improperly represented efficiency points) about the triple pane windows used in the above episode…
My comments:
Multi pane (3 and up) windows are only as good as the distance between the panes, the conductivity of the spacer bar’s material, the quality of the opening seal and the insulation/air tightness of the window frame itself as well as the way the space between the window and wall was sealed and insulated.
Double hungs (used in the show) have poorer sliding seals than casements which have superior compression seals.
Vinyl and fiberglass frames are usually hollow, not insulated and have internal air leaks if not filled and sealed.
Wood (edit: and some composites) is solid and weather proof if clad with vinyl or aluminum.
Aluminum spacer bars (edit: between the panes) (probably used on show) conduct 11 times more heat than stainless steel spacer bars.
The list goes on and on. The new windows on the show could have been more energy efficient for the same or less money then the ones chosen.
Please do more research on windows and teach viewers how to prioritize energy efficiency dollars rather than perpetuate messages already heard in the market place. Www.efficientwindows.org
New green study may be wrong — new energy efficient buildings vs. green rehab
Jan 27th
Lots of folks are touting a new study by The National Trust for Historic Preservation claiming that re-habbing existing buildings is far more green than building new energy efficient buildings — but it’s not at all clear this is accurate.
The study itself is an impressive effort, and I laud their rigorous attempt to dig into this question. But they might be wrong, even though reports are flying around talking about about why you need to rehab instead of build new energy efficient buildings.
My concern is three-fold:
-
A study done at University of Michigan found the opposite result. This study compared the LCA (life cycle analysis) of new construction single family residences, one energy efficient and the not. This found that the ongoing energy use of the buildings outweighed the carbon impact of the materials used by at least 4 to 1, and that was only over a 50 year lifespan (the new study uses a 75 year span). The results clearly indicated that energy use mattered more than the material use for the LCA.
- The National Trust’s own study shows that in a variety of contexts (depending on building type and climate) 10-12 years is all it takes for the energy use of the building to “catch up” with the embodied energy of the materials. When a building’s anticipated lifespan is 50-75 years, then this confirms the University of Michigan study.
- Finally, the new study compares rehabbed buildings to new energy efficient buildings and assumes that the new buildings are a notable 30% more efficient. Depending on the age, type of building and climate, I think this number may be misleadingly low and therefore harms the conclusion of the study. Residential construction in Michigan, for example, had such horrible energy codes until 2008, that a new energy efficient home (especially one that’s built green with a low HERS or ENERGYSTAR index) could easily be 40% more efficient and possibly more.
The new results may be accurate, but there’s plenty of reasons to wait before claiming that new truly energy efficient construction is worse than rehab.
Btw, some disclaimers:
- I have a strong interest and dedication to rehabbing buildings and historic preservation in my personal life and career — which is all the more reason why I want to be clear where the benefits and trade-offs really are.
- despite being right by the University of Michigan, I have no connection to the authors or department which produced the report.
Recycling Small Appliances
Aug 1st
Heya Jacob,
I’m trying to figure out how to get rid of some of small, non-functioning appliances for my partner. She doesn’t want anything to end up in a landfill, which I understand and applaud, but there’s gotta be a solution. I know in Cali, there are places that will try to fix and then give away, and if that’s not possible, will strip and make sure whatever is recycleable will be handled properly, but I can’t seem to find anything comparable in either Detroit or Ann Arbor. I’ve also called a few scrap dealers but they deal in bulk and with bigger, commercial equipment. I’ll keep hunting around, but I thought you might have an idea….
– L in Detroit
For working appliances there area a lot of options now, but for broken appliances… well, small appliances can be a challenge. Here’s what I can suggest for now:
Some big box stores have extensive recycling programs now. For example, Best Buy takes a lot of things. Go here for a nice list of what they will and won’t take.
But some things, like toaster ovens or blenders, are still on their “no” list.
You might try Goodwill, which will sometimes take broken materials and fix them.
Otherwise, the best advice I’ve heard is to look up appliance repair shops and contact them to see if they want it for parts.
I hope this helps. Let us know what you find out!