Posted on Apr 2, 2021
No waste, no carbon, no wonder this net-zero home breaks the mold
1.05K
3
2
1
1
0
All I can say is: WOW! What great packaging. Look at these beautiful Net Zero homes that are great for the environment with No Waste, No Carbon! Beautiful rural setting with large lawns and woodlands and pastures in the background.
I have no doubt these homes are energy efficient and that is good, but making the houses net zero, meaning they are 100% self sufficient for energy by using roof mounted photovoltaic arrays (solar power) in this setting… well it harms the environment more that burning some carbon to heat and/or cool the structure in my opinion, and I have a somewhat informed opinion.
Look at all the large open lawns. This is needed to cut back the trees away from the house so the photovoltaic system has a good southern exposure to work effectively. This takes much habitat away from the environment. They do a good job of making this look natural by including pastureland in a couple pictures, optics is everything. While wind turbans aren’t mentioned in this article, they wouldn’t be effective in these locations typically because of air turbulence between the clear areas and woodlands; making them high enough to overcome this would not be economical; this doesn’t take into account killing birds in the area. We need to remember also that destroying woodlands for required lawns takes away habitat that effectively kills animals.
As I said before it is good to be energy efficient, but I believe this article is at least a bit misleading because all homes can’t be net free due to a number of reasons. To believe all building can be net free is just not rational thinking. MHO
I have no doubt these homes are energy efficient and that is good, but making the houses net zero, meaning they are 100% self sufficient for energy by using roof mounted photovoltaic arrays (solar power) in this setting… well it harms the environment more that burning some carbon to heat and/or cool the structure in my opinion, and I have a somewhat informed opinion.
Look at all the large open lawns. This is needed to cut back the trees away from the house so the photovoltaic system has a good southern exposure to work effectively. This takes much habitat away from the environment. They do a good job of making this look natural by including pastureland in a couple pictures, optics is everything. While wind turbans aren’t mentioned in this article, they wouldn’t be effective in these locations typically because of air turbulence between the clear areas and woodlands; making them high enough to overcome this would not be economical; this doesn’t take into account killing birds in the area. We need to remember also that destroying woodlands for required lawns takes away habitat that effectively kills animals.
As I said before it is good to be energy efficient, but I believe this article is at least a bit misleading because all homes can’t be net free due to a number of reasons. To believe all building can be net free is just not rational thinking. MHO
No waste, no carbon, no wonder this net-zero home breaks the mold
Posted from inhabitat.com
Building
Home
Renewables and Environment
Advertising Sales
Posted 3 y ago
Responses: 1
1
1
0
As I sit here and sip on my tea (Earl Grey, hot) I look out our back window and see our back fence 6 feet away. We have banyan and palm trees around 3 sides of the property, the front being the largest stretch at about 20 feet - just enough room for a driveway. This is more typical of the properties where I live now - SE Florida.
Yea, we can put solar on the roof but I doubt it would be a net zero solar. We could spend tens of thousands of dollars on a geo-thermal system to provide cooling for the house. But, again, probably not net-zero.
Don't get me wrong. I am a very big proponent of not being tied to a grid. But, without a dirt lot to start from and very careful planning, I do not see a way to backfill green tech into 90% of the homes here in Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm counties. And with the higher costs of property here, I see no way 90% of the people could even attempt to afford a backfill project. Couple that with the REGULATORY rules on the books and you are NOT allowed to be disconnected from the grid. <sheesh/>
Yea, we can put solar on the roof but I doubt it would be a net zero solar. We could spend tens of thousands of dollars on a geo-thermal system to provide cooling for the house. But, again, probably not net-zero.
Don't get me wrong. I am a very big proponent of not being tied to a grid. But, without a dirt lot to start from and very careful planning, I do not see a way to backfill green tech into 90% of the homes here in Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm counties. And with the higher costs of property here, I see no way 90% of the people could even attempt to afford a backfill project. Couple that with the REGULATORY rules on the books and you are NOT allowed to be disconnected from the grid. <sheesh/>
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
You are 100% correct. The number of panels required for the photovoltaic system that has the desired power rating can vary greatly on the local geometry of the house: the directional exposure of the roof, the angle of the roof with relationship to the sun, any shade issues, and many others I won’t go into here will affect if one can get the desired power from the system. Many contractors I speak with will say: No big deal on the geometry, just hang more panels until you get the power you need. The types of contractors are just trying to sell. MHO
I was very interested so I priced a system for my house about 12 years ago. Even with a large federal rebate, I forget what it was, it would take a little over 19 years for to just break even with my original cost. Most of the components at that time had a less than 15 year warranty.
This is one the biggest reasons the Left want to drive up the cost of oil and gas energy, because it’s the only way solar and wind power can be competitive with fossil fuels. Don’t get me wrong no one want to see the next break through for a better energy source when it gets here. Our country really needs one, but it must be economical. Pouring money into solar and wind will actually delay the next major breakthrough because they will work against anything that goes against their market share. MHO
I was very interested so I priced a system for my house about 12 years ago. Even with a large federal rebate, I forget what it was, it would take a little over 19 years for to just break even with my original cost. Most of the components at that time had a less than 15 year warranty.
This is one the biggest reasons the Left want to drive up the cost of oil and gas energy, because it’s the only way solar and wind power can be competitive with fossil fuels. Don’t get me wrong no one want to see the next break through for a better energy source when it gets here. Our country really needs one, but it must be economical. Pouring money into solar and wind will actually delay the next major breakthrough because they will work against anything that goes against their market share. MHO
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google