as this year has shown us, simply bolting on 'green' tech to unsustainable things is not necessarily climate action, and it certainly isn't climate proof.
going to lay out a few issues w/ this article
theguardian.com/us-news/2021/a…
going to lay out a few issues w/ this article
theguardian.com/us-news/2021/a…
american houses are massive by european standards. they also consume an absurd amount of energy. this is part of why i became a passivhaus designer over a decade ago. addressing fabric first is critical. bolting on PV doesn't come anywhere close to addressing this problem 
this article is very much like the EV issue.
we have built much of our country to be both unwalkable, & hostile to people biking.
we have destroyed massive swaths of our landscape for inefficient (spatially, energetically) detached homes. homes that require cars for everything
we have built much of our country to be both unwalkable, & hostile to people biking.
we have destroyed massive swaths of our landscape for inefficient (spatially, energetically) detached homes. homes that require cars for everything
so instead of rethinking ways to radically drive down VMTs and corresponding carbon emissions - we're going to spend trillions of dollars in electric vehicles - but this does nothing on unsafe streets, noise pollution, salmon die off, or reversing sprawl
it ignores embodied carbon - always a blind spot.
EVs aren't carbon neutral - and neither is sprawl. EVs are a means of *delaying* climate action and pushing it decades out. even if we get to biden's aggressive 50% of sales by 2030 - this is just 15-20% of total cars on road
EVs aren't carbon neutral - and neither is sprawl. EVs are a means of *delaying* climate action and pushing it decades out. even if we get to biden's aggressive 50% of sales by 2030 - this is just 15-20% of total cars on road
and like how EVs do nothing on all these additional things we need to be addressing wrt climate change and livability - bolting on green things to unsustainable, sprawling houses does nothing in addressing how climate is going to affect them
let's look at the tech mentioned in the piece. i'll start with pricetag which references the rewiring america report (which i criticized in past for same reason).
estimates $70k to decarbonize. there are 128m single family homes. let's say decarb 25%: $2.24 trillion
estimates $70k to decarbonize. there are 128m single family homes. let's say decarb 25%: $2.24 trillion
what do we get for $2.24 trillion dollars?
do we get houses that are ruggedized against wildfire smoke? nope
do we get houses that are ruggedized against cold spikes? nope.
flooding? nope.
fires? nope
do we get houses that are ruggedized against wildfire smoke? nope
do we get houses that are ruggedized against cold spikes? nope.
flooding? nope.
fires? nope
the article mentions insulation in passing - but misses a larger issue in energy efficiency: homes should be undergoing energy audits (which are incredibly cheap) to find out where to focus on getting most band for buck.
insulation is important - but failing to address airtightness can completely undermine added insulation.
per @EPA - air leakage can account for 25-40% of heat loss. so your new heat pump could be undersized - especially at extreme temps
energystar.gov/ia/home_improv…
per @EPA - air leakage can account for 25-40% of heat loss. so your new heat pump could be undersized - especially at extreme temps
energystar.gov/ia/home_improv…
this bolt on tech also fails to mitigate wildfire smoke.
as we've seen this year - wildfires are raging around the world. the spread of wildfire smoke has been beyond anything i could have imagined. climate proof homes need to be ruggedized to adapt: airtightness and ventilation
as we've seen this year - wildfires are raging around the world. the spread of wildfire smoke has been beyond anything i could have imagined. climate proof homes need to be ruggedized to adapt: airtightness and ventilation
off the shelf air purifiers are not adequate for cleaning wildfire smoke that has inundated homes that are not airtight or have ventilation systems w/ adequate filtration.
this was our hack for recent smoke event. worked well. but still limited in capacity.
this was our hack for recent smoke event. worked well. but still limited in capacity.
the storm events over the last few months that have inundated european cities?
the gutters in your house, the stormwater drainage systems in your neighborhood were not designed for these events.
bbc.com/news/world-eur…
the gutters in your house, the stormwater drainage systems in your neighborhood were not designed for these events.
bbc.com/news/world-eur…
water is completely missing from this article as well. water also has a carbon footprint - and with extensive droughts underway in the west coast - BAU will see the carbon footprints of homes steadily increasing.
csu.edu/cerc/researchr…
csu.edu/cerc/researchr…
i am not saying we don't need to get buildings off of fossil fuels or invest in energy efficient appliances, LEDs, etc - we definitely need to be doing all of this.
what i am saying is that by focusing on bolt on tech, instead of a #FabricFirst approach - while simultaneously addressing these other issues i mentioned, especially in a rapidly destabilizing climate - are not going to be anywhere near enough to 'climate proof' one's home.
it also means that homeowners need much larger PV and battery systems (more $$), and larger heat pump systems (more $$) - to decarbonize. it's a means of spending lots of money on gizmos to avoid the changes necessary to adapt to climate change.
in addition - the focus on bolt on tech also means we're looking at spending trillions of dollars without improving:
accessibility/aging in place
indoor air quality
hazardous materials
structural integrity
walkability
it's not enough to be 'climate proof'
accessibility/aging in place
indoor air quality
hazardous materials
structural integrity
walkability
it's not enough to be 'climate proof'
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
