Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zero energy ready homes are coming

energy.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 454 posts

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#371

Post by Maakuth »

beebmam wrote: post #270
DoreenMichele wrote: post #208

Contrary to what I am seeing in comments on HN, this is not just for single family detached housing. If you go to the ZERH website, under Program Requirements it says: Versions 1 and 2, Single Family, Multifamily, and Manufactured Homes https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/zero-energy-ready-home... Additionally, one of the photos in the featured article has the following caption: Lopez Community Land Trust built thi…

It seems unbelievably stupid to me to build solar panel based homes where I live: the northwest US. Makes a heck of a bunch of sense in CA or TX though.

The northwest US doesn't seem* to be worse than most of the Europe, where we have a veritable boom of solar power. Granted, it produces next to nothing during the winter, but the yearly production makes it profitable still. Even for well insulated house you need some heating in the north, but it can be surprisingly little. It's not like these houses are going to be built totally without network mains.

*: https://globalsolaratlas.info/

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#372

Post by rypskar »

beebmam wrote: post #270
DoreenMichele wrote: post #208

Contrary to what I am seeing in comments on HN, this is not just for single family detached housing. If you go to the ZERH website, under Program Requirements it says: Versions 1 and 2, Single Family, Multifamily, and Manufactured Homes https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/zero-energy-ready-home... Additionally, one of the photos in the featured article has the following caption: Lopez Community Land Trust built thi…

It seems unbelievably stupid to me to build solar panel based homes where I live: the northwest US. Makes a heck of a bunch of sense in CA or TX though.

Solar is more effective in low temperatures than in high temperatures. Also northwest US is max around 49 degrees north, which is around Paris in Europe and it is normal to have solar much farther north in Europe

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#373

Post by bluGill »

danans wrote: post #321
bluGill wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suburbs have existed for more than 100 years, and the inner ones have been boxed in that long. They have a proven history of fixing and replacing things.

Older inner denser suburbs, especially those served by mass transit, aren't the issue. It's exurban sprawl.

Those older suburbs are not much denser and they often often don't have transit. People who lived in streetcar suburbs generally expected go get a significant amount of food from their garden which meant lots had to be fairly big, and if you look you discover they were larger lots than current suburbs (or at least that is the case near me). The newer suburbs tend to have dense apartments someplace as well bringing the average up.

Of course new suburbs rarely are built with transit in mind while the oldest were built around the long gone streetcars. This build form doesn't have any affect on solvency though.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#374

Post by bluGill »

coding123 wrote: post #353
kitsunesoba wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind city life for the most part, except for the whole thing with most apartment complexes being built of cardboard, which means that every single thing your upstairs neighbor and many of the things your adjacent neighbors are doing can be heard loud and clear, and this problem plagues even newer construction. And then you have people on the street yelling, vehicles modified to be as loud as possible driving…

This. I see so many people say, build vertical, density. Then when 80% of the people explain that everyone is fucking noisy, the vertical people don't reply.

It is possible to build apartments that are not noisy. It costs more though.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#375

Post by cwalv »

stouset wrote: post #309
johnweldon wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My somewhat libertarian take is that they themselves are best suited to judge what they should or shouldn't want. Not that there isn't a time for trying to bring a different perspective. But we should do it with humility, rather than assuming they're just wrong or misguided. So... yes "stop convincing them" is a valid argument. "convince them not to" is slightly shakier moral ground.

"What they should or shouldn't want" is already deeply influenced by housing policy. Cheap suburban homes which don't fully pay for their externalities are one result of this housing policy, and children grow up accustomed to this bizarro-world reality where increasingly tank-sized cars (this is—astonishingly—not even hyperbole) are the only practical means by which one can go from Point A to Point B. Meanwhile peopl…

> Given that one of these modes of living reliably produces a happier population

Is that really a "given"?

> Given that ... one of the core purposes of cooperative government is to find ways to promote outcomes that benefit everyone despite going against individuals' self-interest

As I see it, government promotes outcomes that benefit "everyone" only by protecting individuals' self-interest.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#376

Post by billfor »

Fauntleroy wrote: post #137
kitsunesoba wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Forget that let’s go all the way and force everybody to live in capsule hotels.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#377

Post by brabel »

rypskar wrote: post #372
beebmam wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems unbelievably stupid to me to build solar panel based homes where I live: the northwest US. Makes a heck of a bunch of sense in CA or TX though.

Solar is more effective in low temperatures than in high temperatures. Also northwest US is max around 49 degrees north, which is around Paris in Europe and it is normal to have solar much farther north in Europe

Solar panels are extremely popular in Stockholm, 59 degrees North and less than 1,000 km from the Artic Circle. During winter, they produce very little electricity, admitedly... but they work well in all the other seasons so they still significantly reduce electricity consumption.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#378

Post by brabel »

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote: post #282
bluGill wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people don't use their yard. They don't have more than a few flowers in the garden. 20 minutes with a push mower is enjoyable exercise but they wouldn't want it to take longer.

The yard isn't necessarily there to be used in the way you mean. Often the yard is a buffer between you and your neighbor. Your noisy neighbor who smokes, swears, and plays the most disagreeable music at the highest volume late into the night. Any distance is helpful. My big problem with cities is the people.

I live in a house with a large yard for the exact reason you point out :).

I do enjoy walking on the grass and taking care of some plants, but I didn't really need so much land if not to keep neighbours away (I used to live in an apartment where a neighbour made my life hell, never again).

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#379

Post by vasco »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #208

Contrary to what I am seeing in comments on HN, this is not just for single family detached housing. If you go to the ZERH website, under Program Requirements it says: Versions 1 and 2, Single Family, Multifamily, and Manufactured Homes https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/zero-energy-ready-home... Additionally, one of the photos in the featured article has the following caption: Lopez Community Land Trust built thi…

I followed you up to the end when you say cities didn't always have more services than small towns and that life in a city wasn't that bad if you were poor. If I think of industrial era first bigger cities, this doesn't seem true? It was way bigger gap between rich and poor quality of life and I'm pretty sure cities always had more services, that's what makes them cities.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#380

Post by Tade0 »

stouset wrote: post #325
twblalock wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep bringing up Tokyo but it's not really relevant. Yes, Tokyo has mixed zoning. But it was developed the way it is because the people who live there want it to be that way. It's also only livable because the people there have a culture that makes it possible to live in high density without high levels of crime, noise, and filth. Americans in the same situation would not have built something like Tokyo. If yo…

> Most Americans want to live in detached homes that they own, and they prefer cars to public transit. Most people just want what they're already accustomed to. We quite literally have the power to influence that instead of just throwing our hands up and saying "well gosh Americans want terribly designed communities whose long-term costs are completely unsustainable, so I guess there's nothing we can do about it." Th…

> Most people just want what they're already accustomed to.

Do they really?

My country is a textbook case of the opposite, where the general population suddenly decided they don't really want to live in apartment blocks in the city - especially the type which was built in the communist second half of the XXth century.

What happened next was intense proliferation of sprawl. It actually was seen as a status symbol back then to be able to afford a detached house.

So much so that the urbanization rate actually slightly fell in the past 20 years.

People gravitate towards comfort and apparently needing to drive everywhere but having enormous living space is preferable to living in a relatively small apartment and walking/cycling.

Post reply on HN