Zero energy ready homes are coming • Hacker News Board

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#131

Post by taude » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 10:59 PM UTC

xyst wrote: post #64

I just see this as another subsidy for single family housing developments. The home may be "zero energy ready" or whatever greenwashing term they want to use. But the fact is they are spending that energy in driving from the sticks (in some cases >20 miles away) and back, driving from their home to the grocery store and back, driving to areas of interest (ie, parks, restaurants, doctors appointments). All of this is…

We already have solutions in place being implemented in the next 10 - 15 years for electric cars and car-based carbon emissions. So carbon based commuting is going to get fixed.

People in the U.S. won't be living in dystopian China-style 40 floor housing anytime soon, in ways that is sounds like you're hoping for with dense city living.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#132

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:00 PM UTC

Syonyk wrote: post #28

When you've confused "per kWh cost" with "energy to the house delivery costs," this sort of stuff sounds good on paper, but it doesn't fundamentally solve the problem that in the winter, homes use a lot more energy than they can generate, and in the spring/fall, they will generate a lot more energy than they need. I've got a large ground mount solar install I put in a few years ago (15.9kW nameplate, though mostly ea…

[deleted]

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#133

Post by jabagonuts » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:02 PM UTC

xthrown1 wrote: post #124

danans wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All of this is dependent on highways and new roads, new electrical, water, and sewage infrastructure. What if this was done this brownfield development in areas with existing infrastructure? New development doesn't need to be coupled with sprawl. There is a significant amount of multifamily development that looks exactly like that. The IRA also included large incentives for the retrofit of the existing housing stoc…

[flagged]

Could you provide a source? I live in a suburban neighborhood built in the 1950s (> 60 yrs ago) bordering a major US city. The neighborhood is thriving (by most metrics) and still relies on a mix of original and upgraded infrastructure.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#134

Post by kitsunesoba » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:03 PM UTC

xyst wrote: post #64

I just see this as another subsidy for single family housing developments. The home may be "zero energy ready" or whatever greenwashing term they want to use. But the fact is they are spending that energy in driving from the sticks (in some cases >20 miles away) and back, driving from their home to the grocery store and back, driving to areas of interest (ie, parks, restaurants, doctors appointments). All of this is…

I'm no expert in this field, but I think that changing zoning in current suburbs to mixed use would go a long way towards fixing them. The central wards of Tokyo are surrounded by such mixed use residential areas and it works extremely well, with most necessities being within walking distance or at worst biking distance.

It wouldn't fix the suburbs' lack of density, but it'd still be a marked improvement. It'd theoretically lighten the burden suburbs place on cities too, since there'd be a lot more corner shops and the like paying taxes.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#135

Post by prottog » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:04 PM UTC

xthrown1 wrote: post #130

Dig1t wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this mean exactly? Like we should be forcing people to move into big cities? What about all the people that don't want to live that kind of lifestyle?

Let them pay the $20,000 in rates they will without subsidies from the inner core. The free market will sort it out in short order.

> without subsidies from the inner core

Like how the residents of New York City are able to get the food and water it needs all produced within the five boroughs? Or is that a different kind of "subsidy" from the hinterlands.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#136

Post by richwater » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:05 PM UTC

xthrown1 wrote: post #124

danans wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All of this is dependent on highways and new roads, new electrical, water, and sewage infrastructure. What if this was done this brownfield development in areas with existing infrastructure? New development doesn't need to be coupled with sprawl. There is a significant amount of multifamily development that looks exactly like that. The IRA also included large incentives for the retrofit of the existing housing stoc…

[flagged]

Nah. Maybe you are fine living in a shoebox with 1,000 other people in a single building, but we shouldn't normalize it.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#137

Post by Fauntleroy » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:05 PM UTC

kitsunesoba wrote: post #134

xyst wrote: post #64

I just see this as another subsidy for single family housing developments. The home may be "zero energy ready" or whatever greenwashing term they want to use. But the fact is they are spending that energy in driving from the sticks (in some cases >20 miles away) and back, driving from their home to the grocery store and back, driving to areas of interest (ie, parks, restaurants, doctors appointments). All of this is…

I'm no expert in this field, but I think that changing zoning in current suburbs to mixed use would go a long way towards fixing them. The central wards of Tokyo are surrounded by such mixed use residential areas and it works extremely well, with most necessities being within walking distance or at worst biking distance. It wouldn't fix the suburbs' lack of density, but it'd still be a marked improvement. It'd theore…

If you can find a way to convince Americans they don't all need a yard that can easily fit 6 (japanese) houses, we'll be well on our way.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#138

Post by turtlebits » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:06 PM UTC

paganel wrote: post #89

Crazy how the Americans try to create "zero energy homes" (whatever that means) using basically wood structures. Wood is a very, very bad heat insulator. The best proven heat insulator when it comes to building a home is earth itself, that's why for hundreds to thousands of years dug-out huts have been the norm on several continents, for different cultures/civilisations. Granted, you cannot build a macmansion-like ho…

Earth isn't a great insulator either, which is why insulation is used. Earth is good for thermal mass, which is another thing.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#139

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:06 PM UTC

IncRnd wrote: post #98

xyst wrote: post #64

I just see this as another subsidy for single family housing developments. The home may be "zero energy ready" or whatever greenwashing term they want to use. But the fact is they are spending that energy in driving from the sticks (in some cases >20 miles away) and back, driving from their home to the grocery store and back, driving to areas of interest (ie, parks, restaurants, doctors appointments). All of this is…

> All of this is dependent on highways and new roads, new electrical, water, and sewage infrastructure. This is all very expensive to build and maintain, and the cities and municipalities are left to foot the bill. That's not generally how this works. There aren't necessarily highways and new paved roads going to rural properties. Electrical service isn't only downtown in cities but for miles outside of them or from…

> As everyone who has built a property outside of some service area knows, the homeowner is the one who pays to drop the lines or service to the properety.

I've read recently that as of right now, if you're more than 1000 yards from the branch point the electrical company would run wire from, it is already cheaper to go fully off-grid. Not 100% true that this is true or at least universally applicable, but the curves all point in that direction.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#140

Post by johnweldon » Tue, Mar 07, 2023, 11:07 PM UTC

xyst wrote: post #64

I just see this as another subsidy for single family housing developments. The home may be "zero energy ready" or whatever greenwashing term they want to use. But the fact is they are spending that energy in driving from the sticks (in some cases >20 miles away) and back, driving from their home to the grocery store and back, driving to areas of interest (ie, parks, restaurants, doctors appointments). All of this is…

Generally speaking, people will always choose to spend money living as close to their ideal as they can, with the resources they are able to give toward it.

The fact that so many people choose to live in suburbs, or the "sticks", suggests that there is something desirable to _them_ about living there. I.e. the same spending power required to live in a house in the suburbs, or rurally, could usually be used to live in higher density living, closer to urban centers, but instead they choose to suffer long commutes and expensive transportation in order to enjoy a different lifestyle.

I think it's naive to suggest that "American housing" is a Ponzi scheme.