Zero energy ready homes are coming • Hacker News Board

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#431

Post by rootusrootus » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 3:58 PM UTC

zamnos wrote: post #219

rootusrootus wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your points require a very specific definition of suburban. Many cities in the western US are almost 100% suburban, but if that gets brought up the goalposts move.

Is that really a city though? Wouldn't that more accurately described as a big collection of suburban sprawl? I don't have a particular people/sq mile/meter figure in mind, but if it's not dense enough to justify public transportation and for it to be comfortable to live without a car (ie a single train/bus/tram per hour doesn't count), I say we don't actually call it a city because it really isn't.

Is Portland a city? Because it is almost 100% made up of what would otherwise be considered suburban neighborhoods. Single family homes with yards. There is a tiny core nestled between the river and the hills with a few blocks of urban city. The city does have public transportation. Though you'd mostly find that living without a car would require sacrifices that people aren't willing to make.

And what about out west of there? Beaverton, is that city? Hillsboro? These places are suburban cities with public transit.

Could also look north, to Seattle. Larger than Portland for sure, but fundamentally similar concept.

So this is where I see the goalposts getting moved. Lots of people say 'suburban' and only think of the endless tracts of housing with no commercial or retail space. That's just one kind of suburbia. Common in some regions (midwest comes to mind), less so in others.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#432

Post by jonfw » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 4:12 PM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #296

makomk wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only works on short timescales, which isn't the main problem because there are so many ways of solving that (for example batteries or thermal storage for home heating).

If they have notice the smelter will be happy to shutdown for maintenance for a few months. You need to plan this with them a year in advance though.

Seasonal operation is not desirable and has lots and lots of side effects.

As an example, a smelter that operates half the year takes twice as much capital to produce the same throughput as one that operates year round.

That’s before we get into all of the reasons that seasonal labor is undesirable, or how much additional warehouse capacity would be required to stockpile the metal which will needed over the unoperational months, or the raw material being stockpiled while it’s unable to be processed, or the impact on just in time supply chains, etc.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#433

Post by londons_explore » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 4:15 PM UTC

westurner wrote: post #347

westurner wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passive solar building design : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_solar_building_design#... Low-energy house: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-energy_house List of low-energy building techniques: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_low-energy_building_te... /? Passive solar home (tbm=isch image search) https://www.google.com/search?q=passive+solar+home&tbm=isch /? Passive solar house: https://youtube.com/resul…

Walipini passive solar green houses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walipini Earthship passive solar homes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship Underground living: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_living Root cellar passive refrigeration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_cellar Ground source heat pump (Geothermal heat pump) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_source_heat_pump Solar-assisted heat pump:…

This is a pile of vaguely relevant facts...

I think in my HN comments I'd prefer a couple of facts and a conclusion, with citations for more detail.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#434

Post by jonfw » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 4:25 PM UTC

ahoy wrote: post #92

This is good, in the way that filtered cigarretes are better than unfiltered. As long we we keep building & being forced to live in low density, single-family houses, we'll keep consuming the huge physical and energy resources necessary to sustain them. I'm not saying we have to turn every neighborhood into manhattan, far from it. But this is similar to the gas -> electric car change. Yeah, it's a marginal improvemen…

I don’t know where you live, but I had to pay extra for my SFH, a condo or townhome in an equivalent location is significantly cheaper

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#435

Post by cwalv » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 4:57 PM UTC

stouset wrote: post #392

cwalv wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Everyone already actively works at protecting their own self interest. We don’t need help promoting good societal outcomes when those are a natural result of people looking out for themselves. Government exists for us to collectively agree that there exist goals that require us to set aside self-interest for the better of everyone. It’s in my self-interest to take everything you own and to dump my waste in the neares…

I see what you're saying .. and yes, it's (obviously) true that in order to protect individuals' rights we necessarily have to restrict some: to protect individuals' property rights means we have to restrict what non-owners are allowed to do with that property.

But to say that Government exists to promote outcomes that benefit everyone against individuals' self-interest is like saying that pit-mines exist because we enjoy creating giant pits. Or that cars exist so that we can burn a bunch of fuel. The restrictions on individuals' rights are necessary evils, which need to be carefully considered and minimized.

Hearing it framed the way you did does help me understand many peoples' points of view better though.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#436

Post by mindslight » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:11 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #348

mindslight wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Permitted grid connected solar costs 5x that and disconnecting from the grid is not permitted. Why not treat them as independent problems - an off-grid solar system for most of your electricity, while also maintaining a nominal (/backup) grid connection? If your home is already connected to the grid, then I would think the ongoing cost would be minimal and could be viewed as just another tax.

That's a fair question but it doesn't really save you any money, and just costs more for a breaker to switch back and forth. Everything still needs to be inspected and permitted to the same level of rigor because it is still technically wired to the grid and you just have more elements which could malfunction in a less standard configuration

If a hardwired interconnect to the grid is what triggers your permit/license requirements, then forget that I threw out the "backup" functionality. Ignore the grid connection and just treat the monthly service charge as another tax.

Or if you can get away with having a power inlet on your off grid system and powering that system from the grid with an extension cord during temporary backup/maintenance conditions only, go for that.

For my own AHJ, grid interconnect has nothing to do with whether permits/licenses are required (and for homeowner work, they're not). So an off-grid system and grid-connected are under the same requirements there regardless. A grid-tie system that can feed back power to the grid requires additional signoff/agreement with the POCO though.

(I'm very sympathetic to the situations where the utility will demand some stiff fee to build out a grid connection to a new residence, while local regulations require this connection for occupancy. But this isn't what you described)

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#437

Post by vkou » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

tonyarkles wrote: post #415

vkou wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't need a source, it's simple math. For a plant to absorb 1KG of CO2, it needs to increase in weight by at least ~1Kg. An average human exhales ~1KG of CO2 a day. Unless your house plants are gaining half a ton of mass a year, they aren't meaningfully offsetting your CO2 exhilation.

I’m still with you and your point remains, but the plants do release O2 and just retain the C if I recall. Your plants only need to weigh 27% of that at the end of the year, or about 100kg :D

Unless your plants are made out of pure diamond, they also need to gain hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen in weight.

But you are part-right, carbon is ~35-50% of a normal plant's weight.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#438

Post by bluGill » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:45 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #331

bluGill wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heat exchangers have been code for more than 20 years. Maybe not common, but only because there are a lot of old houses. Or maybe where you live didn't adopt the new code?

I have a house that's less than 20 and it doesn't have a heat exchanger. I haven't heard of the new construction around here having any. Perhaps it's only in certain states?

I'm most familiar with Minnesota of 20 years ago, which being a cold area does tend to adopt cold weather codes quicker than others.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#439

Post by stouset » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:53 PM UTC

cwalv wrote: post #435

stouset wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone already actively works at protecting their own self interest. We don’t need help promoting good societal outcomes when those are a natural result of people looking out for themselves. Government exists for us to collectively agree that there exist goals that require us to set aside self-interest for the better of everyone. It’s in my self-interest to take everything you own and to dump my waste in the neares…

I see what you're saying .. and yes, it's (obviously) true that in order to protect individuals' rights we necessarily have to restrict some: to protect individuals' property rights means we have to restrict what non-owners are allowed to do with that property. But to say that Government exists to promote outcomes that benefit everyone against individuals' self-interest is like saying that pit-mines exist because we…

That would be like saying government exists because we enjoy bureaucracies.

We accept bureaucracies because it helps us achieve common good that wouldn’t exist if everyone only looked out for themselves.

Roads and other infrastructure. Plumbing and water treatment. Sewers. Building codes. Schools for everyone. On and on and on these are things we’ve decided we’re better if everyone has access to or has to abide by, even if individually nobody would make it happen.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#440

Post by vineyardmike » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 6:24 PM UTC

rr888 wrote: post #414

vineyardmike wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that subsidize urban cores Subsidized by urban cores. Who do you think is paying for those $50M highway exits and overpasses so everyone can quickly get to their strip malls? Its not the local residents.

Well in my state generally the wealthiest people live in suburbs and pay all the taxes. The poorest areas are in cities and get the subsidies. So the suburbs are subsidising the cities. And that was before everyone started WFH so downtowns are now really empty.

What subsidies? What about businesses and their taxes? Wealthier people don’t always pay more in taxes, even at a localized level, and businesses tend to be based out of the cities.

When people talk about the “subsidy of the suburbs” they usually talk about the cost of maintaining suburban life, vs the tax base that supports it. Eg property tax usually goes to the town to pay for the town’s infra, while income tax goes to the state to pay for other thing. When the town can’t cover its cost and depends on the state’s money or when the state pays to build things in the town, that’s where the “subsidy” comes in. Often towns just can’t cover the cost of their basic infrastructure maintenance, but even when they can, the state usually still build highways and other big projects which can cost $10s to $100s of millions, and rarely can be affordable by the actual tax base of the town.