QUEST Community Science Blog Author: Jim Gunshinan

Home » Jim Gunshinan

 

Jim Gunshinan is a Science Writer and Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine in Berkeley, California (Located at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab). Home Energy covers energy-efficient, healthy, affordable, and green home building and renovation for a North American readership that includes building scientists, builders, contractors, energy auditors, weatherization professionals, and energy programs staff. He is most passionate about the boundary between science and religion. After working as a research assistant at Penn State, where he did research on blood flow patterns in the artificial heart, he followed another path to the seminary and priesthood in the Catholic Church. Eight years ago he left the priesthood and returned to science as a science writer. He's always been curious, and the places he has gone reflect that central part of his nature.


Website: http://homeenergy.org


All Posts by Jim:

    Thoughts on Science and Religion

    May 16th, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    The universe is made of stories.

    The Universe Is Made of Stories
    I think the central story of Christianity is not one of the parables of Jesus, or even his death and resurrection, but a simple story of a meal shared with friends. The story goes like this: Jesus took a loaf of bread in his hands, blessed it, broke it, and shared it with those around him. This story tells me how to live a good life. If I take each moment as it comes, if I enter into the moment, if I don’t hold back, if I share the moment with those around me, then I am living a good life–solving a problem at my job, sharing the road on my way home, sharing dinner with my wife, reading a good novel while she practices at the piano, making love, taking out the trash, and walking the dog.

    Religious people argue with atheists and scientific materialists over the existence of God. Agnostics, people who may have a sense of the sacred in their lives, who claim to be spiritual, but not religious, reject any formal organization of religious thought and practice. There is truth in every perspective, but I want to try to answer the atheists and the agnostics. I’ll use poet Muriel Rukeyser in my answer to the atheists. She wrote “The universe is made of stories, not atoms.” There are scientific stories, such as the Big Bang theory about the origins of the universe, or Sir Isaac Newton’s story of a canon ball’s trajectory from the mouth of a canon. And there are religious stories like the one I described above. Scientific stories and religious stories are qualitatively different. Maybe scientific stories tell us how things work and religious stories tell us how to live a good life.

    In my answer to the agnostics I will use poetry as well. Poetry is particular. Jane Kenyon wrote a poem about a man in a coffee shop eating yogurt out of a container with a white plastic spoon. She could have written about eating in general, but I don’t think it would have made a very interesting poem. Religion is particular and interesting, while spirituality is general and boring. Someone who samples a number of religious traditions is still being religious, I think. They just may be missing the benefit of going deeply into any one tradition.

    Religious traditions tell different stories about what it is to be human and what it means to live a good life in a particular culture. I wonder if Catholicism would make more sense in Asian cultures if, instead of using bread in the Mass, we used rice cakes. Christianity took root in Latin America only after the Blessed Mother appeared to Juan Diego, a poor peasant, in the form of a “mestiza,” a woman of mixed European and American Indian descent. Buddhism, with its story of Siddhartha finding enlightenment beneath the Bodi tree, seems to make perfect sense to many people in the West, and many people in the West find enlightenment and wisdom through the Sufi poet Rumi, an excellent story teller. The central Jewish story of the exodus from slavery in Egypt has had meaning for other oppressed peoples, especially those in Latin America.

    I think the universe is made of stories–scientific and religious types of stories. I could not imagine life without either one of them.

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.



    Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

    37.8686, -122.267

    Posted in KQED, Partners | * 2 Comments

    Mapping Our Carbon Footprints

    May 2nd, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    Your house may not be your biggest contributer to global
    warming. Credit: Jim Gunshinan.

    My focus in this blog had been on green homes, but there are other areas of our lives that account for our total carbon footprint–how much carbon we are responsible for adding to the atmosphere–a measure of our contribution to global warming. Our houses and apartments, but also our cars, air travel, and the food we eat all contribute.

    Don Fugler, who does research for the Canada Housing and Mortgage Corporation, estimated the amount each area of our lives contributes to our carbon footprint. He used a hypothetical family of four (two adults, two kids) in Ottawa, with a medium-sized house (2,400 square feet), and two cars (Ford Explorer and Honda Fit) to do the calculations. Both parents work and travel about 20 miles roundtrip to work each weekday. The kids travel a few miles each day back and forth to school. Both parents make a total of five trips to Toronto and five trips to other places each year for business, and the family goes on a yearly ski trip to Whistler by air travel, and back and forth by car to visit relatives in Nova Scotia once a year.

    For us Californians, replace Ottawa with Oakland, Whistler with Lake Tahoe, add a trip to Hawaii, and subtract most of the energy used for heating a house, and I think we come close to the Canadian example.

    The folks who brought us the movie also gave us a nifty
    carbon calculator. Use it to measure the size of your carbon
    footprint (go to www.climatecrisis.net/takeaction).
    Credit: www.climatecrisis.net

    Our hypothetical family, according to Don’s calculations, emits about 13 tons of CO2 from their house, about 14 tons because of air travel, about 10 tons from their cars, and about 5 tons from the food they eat (including growing, shipping, and waste disposal). Notice that the highest amount is from air travel!

    The folks who brought us the movie An Inconvenient Truth also provide an online calculator so that you can more accurately calculate your contribution to global warming–the site also gives good information on how to reduce your carbon footprint. Don recommends that we conduct more and more of our business using the Internet instead of traveling far from our homes, live close to our jobs in dense urban areas with good public transportation, ride our bikes a lot, and all become vegetarians.


    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.



    Tags: , , , , , , , ,

    37.8686, -122.267

    Posted in Environment, KQED, Partners | Please Comment

    One Part Perspiration, Five Parts Inspiration

    April 18th, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    These 5 folks are full of bright ideas.
    Image Source: PiccoloNamek    ACI trains home performance professionals through national and regional conferences and through the Web. Last week I participated in my eighth ACI national conference. The annual conference is where I go to network; learn about all aspects of home performance; recruit authors for Home Energy Magazine; and best of all, be inspired.

    Here are a few of the people that I ran into last week who inspire me:

    Don Fugler does research through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. He developed the Garbage Bag Air Flow Test. He rides his bike to work year round in Ottawa, and wears suspenders. He has a dry sense of humor and has toppled any lingering stereotype I had about Canadians. He told a crowded room at the ACI meetings in Pittsburgh that the way we live in our houses, the way we use our cars, and the way we travel in the air contribute about equally to our carbon footprints. The way we eat contributes a lot also. A pound of beef is responsible for a heck of a lot of greenhouse gases released. I don’t know if Don is a vegetarian, but I think he probably is.

    Jim LaRue is a sort-of-retired home performance contractor from Cleveland, Ohio. He designed a really efficient and healthy house for a group of nuns in Ohio and wrote about it for Home Energy. He has also written for the Cleveland Green Building Coalition and for the magazine a Greening Your Home series of articles. I don’t know anyone who has worked harder to create healthy, efficient, and affordable housing in Cleveland. He’s retired but so far no one has noticed.

    Linda Wigington has been with ACI since its beginning and is now the manager of program design and development. At the ACI Summit on global climate change held at the Pacific Energy Center in San Francisco last summer, which she was instrumental in bringing about, she talked about how she lived one whole winter in her home outside of Pittsburgh while never raising her thermostat above 50 degrees Fahrenheit. She is passionate about finding ways (mostly not involving such personal discomfort) to drastically reduce the energy use in existing homes to reduce the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.

    Kate and Paul Raymer, founders of Hayoka Solutions, a green building and green building advocacy organization, announced the Starting from Home Challenge at the ACI meetings, an annual contest for post secondary school students around the country to create 70%–90% energy savings in existing homes with real people living in them. Hayoka is a Lakota Indian word describing someone who causes others to see things in a completely new way. Paul is an expert in healthy home ventilation. Don’t get him started on attached garages. “Why would anyone park their car in their house?” Paul often wonders.

    I could go on, and on, and on. These are just a few of the people who inspire me. I hope they inspire you as well.

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.



    Tags: , , , , , ,

    37.8686, -122.267

    Posted in Education, Engineering, Environment, KQED, Partners | Please Comment

    Stop Energy Going Down the Drain

    April 4th, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    Here are three of the DWHR devices tested, showing the
    headers: Left to right, the Retherm S3-60, GFX G3-60,
    and PowerPipe S3-60. Credit: Charles Zaloum    I don’t think there is one big solution to our energy problems and the environmental problems related to the use of fossil fuels–there are lots of little solutions that in the end add up to a big solution.One of those little solutions I have been reading a lot about lately is a Drain Water Heat Recovery Device (DWHR). It looks like part of something you would find hidden in the hills and hollows of Appalachia that makes moonshine, but a DWHR device is a simple copper coil that you put around your shower drain that recovers some of the heat from your shower water. Cold water is circulated through the coils, gets heated by the drain water, and then flows into your hot water tank, or into your shower and hot water tank.The device is simple, effective, and doesn’t require much (like, no) maintenance. Drain water heat recovery devices contribute to large energy savings in laundries and in multifamily buildings, but will also work very well in single-family homes–as long as there is room under the showers. My one-story house in Walnut Creek is not a good candidate for such a device.

    The simple workings of a drain water heat recovery device.
    Credit: gfxstar.ca, Inventroment Energy Solutions.    Canadian researchers from Natural Resources Canada tested the effectiveness of several DWHR devices at the Canadian Centre for Housing Technology. For an Ottawa household in which four people each take 12 minutes showers every day, a DWHR will save $150 a year in energy costs (at present, Canadian dollars are about equivalent to U.S. dollars). That’s about three times as much energy saved as the energy used to run an energy-efficient 20-cubic-foot refrigerator for a year. Over the 30-year lifetime of the DHWR, which costs about $800 including installation, the device will save the household close to $3,000.The Canadian researchers created a Web-based Drain Water Heat Recovery-Energy Savings Calculator where building contractors, plumbers, and homeowners can go to estimate the cost effectiveness of several DWHR devices on the market. You just need to know the model of the device, the temperature of your shower water, estimated shower times, and so on. Right now it is set to work for Canadian locations. For U.S. homeowners, you have to pick a city in Canada. The calculator will be updated as newer technology is developed and tested.

    Here are some Web sites where you can find out more about DWHR devices that were submitted for testing at the Canadian Centre for Housing Technology:

    If a million households in the United States installed DWHR devices, we’d save a collective $150 million in annual energy costs, or about the equivalent of 1.25-billion kWh of electricity–or a ginormous amount of carbon dioxide in air from the natural gas not burned and electricity not generated.

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.


    Tags: , , , ,

    ,

    Posted in Engineering, Environment, KQED, Partners | * 4 Comments

    Forgive Me Father, for I Have Polluted

    March 21st, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    Polluting Makes Vatican List of Grave Social Sins

    Over the course of a week of working with concrete,
    this landscaping job produced only one bucket
    of wastewater. Credit: Ann Hutcheson-Wilcox    As a lifelong Catholic and former Catholic priest, I often find myself wishing that the Church would stick to what it knows best: the Sacraments. I wish the Pope would declare a 10-year moratorium on anyone with any authority in the Church saying anything at all about sexuality.

    But sometimes the Vatican gets it right.

    Polluting is a now a recognized social sin, along with another act that tends to wreck havoc on the environment, that is, contributing to the growing social and economic divide between rich and poor. The rich contribute inordinately to pollution and the poor suffer inordinately from it.

    The Church has installed photovoltaics (PV) on the roofs of some Vatican buildings, and has recognized the scientific consensus that humans contribute to global warming. One of my teachers in the Divinity program at Notre Dame, Fr. Tim O’Meara, said that the Church responds quite slowly to crisis and change. “It spends twenty-five years denying the problem, twenty-five years quietly addressing it, and twenty-five years claiming that this is the way we’ve always done things.” So by historical standards, the Church is moving with lightning speed.

    One of my coworkers at Home Energy told me that she viewed the new sin as another tool in the environmental education toolbox. Through her experience as an environmental organizer, policy analyst, and fundraiser, she has learned that individuals are motivated to take action on behalf of the environment due to personal belief or their own unique life experience. While working with contractors on her own home, she has often found it challenging to explain to people in the trades why she feels that it is her responsibility to go beyond business as usual. Last week’s announcement that “la contaminación ahora es un pecado” (pollution is now a sin) came just at the right time. The contractors she was working with to rebuild a retaining wall made primarily of reused concrete and found objects figured out how to avoid dumping any wastewater into her gutter, which empties directly into the local creek, a home for native rainbow trout. If pollution were not yet a sin, they may not have been as willing to consider the alternatives. Over the course of a week of working with concrete, they produced only one bucket of wastewater.

    The new sins do present a challenge to the imagination of poets like myself. In Dante’s Divine Comedy there is no place in hell for unrepentant polluters. Now that the Vatican has named pollution a serious social sin, we may have to invent a punishment, and a metaphorical place in hell for polluters. Let’s see-tyrants, assassins, and warmongers swim in a river of boiling blood, and the wrathful tear each other to pieces with their teeth-maybe polluters will have to tread water in that twice-Texas-sized trash dump floating in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch for all eternity, or at least until we decide how to clean it up.

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.


    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

    37.8686, -122.267

    Posted in Environment, Partners | * 2 Comments

    $15 per gallon of gas… coming soon?

    March 7th, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    What will life be like when gasoline reaches $15 per gallon?

    We may have to slow down our too-often
    fast paced and frenetic lifestyles—a blessing in
    disguise?
    That’s the question asked of a group of scientists, sociologists, others, and myself who gathered at the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) Summer Study in 2006. (ACEEE has really great resources for consumers on its Web site, including energy efficiency ratings for cars and appliances.) The Summer Study is on my mind because every two years ACEEE hires Home Energy to come down to Asilomar State Beach and Conference Center in Pacific Grove, California to publish a daily newsletter at the meetings. I know, a tough assignment!

    Besides traditional presentations and discussion, the last Summer Study on residential energy use had groups competing to heat water above 1400F using a pop bottle, some bubble wrap, aluminum foil, a test tube, and the partial sunshine of the Pacific Coast. And, as I described in my introduction, the Summer Study gathers experts in many fields to look to the future and try to imagine what life will be like when fossil fuels begin to run out. Many people (including me) think we have reached worldwide peak oil, and the downward trend in oil production will bring higher and higher prices at the pump, for heating oil, and for many things we use every day that are either made from fossil fuels or are transported to us using fossil fuels.

    When gasoline hits $15 per gallon, I think we will all be driving less. As transportation costs rise higher and higher, I think we will be forced to buy food grown locally and products made locally. It will still make sense to import some things from other states and other countries, but that will be increasingly rare. And I don’t think we’ll be building big houses in the suburbs and exurbs much. It will cost too much to heat, cool, and power a 4,000 to 5,000 square foot house and also commute 100 miles a day to work, even if the driver makes good money.

    While a few religious people will wait and hope for the end of the world, I think many more will look to their local faith communities, as well as their families and friends, for mutual support as energy and other resources become scarce and fear towards the future increases. (Didn’t churches invent the food bank?) I’m not sure that we’ll all be living in communes, but there will be more groups living in large homes, and more people living in apartments, condominiums, or small single-family homes in or near cities.

    Buses, subways, trains, and other forms of mass transportation will become much more popular, and large SUVs driven to the grocery store and soccer practices will become rare. I also predict… that hand cranks for windows, like I have on my 1997 Geo Prizm, will make a comeback! It will be harder to get parts for our complicated, automated machines and home appliances, and simple, tried and true technology will be in.

    What do you think life will be like when gasoline costs $15 per gallon?

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.


    Tags: , , , , , , ,

    37.8686, -122.267

    Posted in Environment, Partners | Please Comment

    Building to Beat Climate Change and Save Energy

    February 23rd, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    Low winter light over the town of Iqaluit,
    the capitol of Nunavut,Canada. Photo by Bill Semple,
    architect and senior researcher at the Canada Mortgage
    and Housing Corporation.    I recently heard Tom Friedman, the New York Times columnist, speak at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab about his soon to be published new book, Green: The New Red, White and Blue. I can’t say much about his book because it hasn’t yet been published, and he only offered an outline. He did conclude his talk by emphasizing the need to take a systematic approach to solving our energy problems. “We need clean electrons traveling though an efficient distribution system into smart homes.” Amen to that! By the way, I’ll probably be shelling out some cash for Tom’s book, even though I hardly ever buy the hardback version.

    Among home performance professionals, we also call the systemic approach, the whole house approach. For example, we think it is best to retrofit your home to make it more energy efficient before you invest in an expensive solar electric, or PV, system. You can buy a smaller PV system that way, and draw less energy from the electric grid. We think you should switch to CFL bulbs right now, buy Energy Star appliances when you need new appliances, and before the next hot summer have a home performance professional air seal your attic and add insulation. Make sure the contractor checks to see if you have proper ventilation in your home after air sealing-otherwise your gas appliances may back draft nasty things like carbon monoxide into your living spaces. Don’t go out and buy new windows, no matter what the advertisers tell you, until your old windows are worn out. In other words, do it all, but when the time is right.

    There is a debate going on in our country about how to solve our energy and environmental problems. Some say corn ethanol is the answer; others say it’s cellulosic ethanol. Some say wind energy and some say solar energy; some say more government regulation is the answer and some say let the free market decide. These either/or approaches are wrong in my book. The more we are divided in our passion to solve our problems, the less likely we are able to solve them. The best-built homes are the ones in which all the parts-building site, building envelope, walls, foundation, attic, roof, HVAC system, appliances, lighting, and people-work in harmony and are most adaptable to change.

    Tom Friedman also said in his talk at Berkeley Lab that writing in blogs about solving our energy problems is not enough. In our March/April 2008 issue of Home Energy we will publish a story about home building in the far north of Canada, within the Arctic Circle. The Inuit people who live there are already building to adapt to the climate change that is already occurring, as well as preparing for more climate change in the future. They are building homes that are culturally appropriate. They are also building in a way that will reduce as much as possible the emissions of greenhouse gases that are causing climate change. Amen to that! Amen to the systematic approach!

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.


    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

    ,

    Posted in Engineering, Environment, Partners | * 1 Comment

    Save the rabbit (eared antennas)

    February 8th, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    Don’t Sweat the Switch from Analog to Digital TV Broadcasting. The Government Will Rescue Your Old TV. Mostly.

    What does this have to do with energy conservation? Read on.

    Every old TV will be new again–for about $10.
    Photo credit: Human Productivity Lab,
    licensed through Creative Commons.    When I was still new to the Bay Area, I lived in a one-room apartment near the Gourmet Ghetto in Berkeley. I was working at Black Oak Books and spent many a late night after work winding down by watching reruns of NewsRadio, about the best TV comedy series to come along in the 1990s. I miss Bill McNeal, the character played by the late comedian Phil Hartman. And I had a big crush on the Lisa Miller character, played by ER’s Maura Tierney. Now that I have cable, I can watch 3 PBS stations and the Discovery Channel, but back in the day, if I nailed my rabbit ear antenna high up on the wall and turned it just right, I could get NewsRadio, a lifesaver.

    If you still have one of those old rabbit ear antennas, or have one on your roof, hold on to it.

    As of February 17, 2009, when all the major TV broadcasters will begin to transmit using a digital signal, no one with an analog, rabbit-eared television set will be able to get anything without a digital-to-analog converter box. If you have a digital TV, or pay for cable or satellite TV service, you’re good– you don’t have to do anything. But if you have an old analog set, you’ll need to buy a converter box costing about $50.

    But don’t fret, because your government has come to the rescue-with coupons worth $40.

    Between January 1, 2008, and March 31, 2009, all U.S. households will be able to request up to two coupons, worth $40 each, for the purchase of eligible digital-to-analog converter boxes. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) is administering the coupon program, and has a list of eligible converter boxes as well as information about getting coupons.

    The entry of perhaps millions of digital-to-analog TV converters could add yet another widely used electronic device to strain the U.S. power grid, add to carbon emissions, increase our dependence on foreign sources of fossil fuels, and so on-you know the drill. But thanks to the efforts of folks at the Natural Resources Defense Council, the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, and other energy efficiency advocates, those converter boxes will run on as little energy as possible, especially during the 20 or so hours a day when no one is watching TV. The Department of Commerce has issued a ruling that eligible devices can use no more than two watts while in “sleep” mode, and that the devices will automatically go into sleep mode after four hours of inactivity. The four-hour delay will be set as the default mode at the factory, but users can adjust the delay time at home or disable the automatic switching to sleep mode.

    So don’t throw away your old TV sets. You’ll be able to use them after February 17, 2009, but it will cost you about $10, plus the free coupon from the feds. And you’ll probably be burning a lot less electricity with your old TV and converter box than with one of those new monster plasma screen TVs.

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.


    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    ,

    Posted in Engineering, Partners | * 3 Comments

    Who Controls Your Thermostat? Part 2

    January 25th, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    No, this is not Big Brother. Credit: Jim GunshinanThe answer to the question, Who controls your thermostat?, which I raised in an earlier post, is now clearly answered. You control your thermostat!

    The California Energy Commission (CEC) was to require, as part of the 2008 Title 24 building standards, that all new homes be outfitted with programmable communicating thermostats (PCT). The PCTs would allow a utility to remotely control your thermostat during power emergencies, especially during hot summer days when air conditioning use causes electricity demand to peak. By cutting peak electricity demand in this way, California could potentially avoid rolling blackouts and even eliminate the need for building expensive new “peaker” power plants, or firing up old, dirty plants just to meet an afternoon’s demand for electricity. But after a chorus of criticism from individuals and groups around the state, CEC has dropped the rule from the standards.

    From the CEC Web site:

    “There has been considerable discussion concerning programmable communicating thermostats (PCT) and their proposed inclusion in the regulations for the 2008 building standards. On January 15, 2008, the Energy Commission’s Efficiency Committee (Commissioner Rosenfeld and Chairman Pfannenstiel) directed that PCTs be removed from the proposed 2008 energy efficiency building standards.”

    News of Home Energy’s and my support in particular for PCTs made it’s way into some online discussion boards and we felt the backlash. I’ve never been called a fascist before! I mistakenly believed that under the new rule, a utility would not be able to fiddle with your thermostat without your permission, even in an emergency. But if I looked carefully at the proposed standard, I would have read, “The PCT shall not allow customer changes to thermostat settings during emergency events.” I was wrong.

    So, Big Brother will not be controlling your thermostat anytime soon. That’s a good thing, and, in fact, the CEC now agrees:

    “Technology can be a powerful tool in managing our energy use. However, it is of utmost importance that consumers make their own energy decisions.”

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.

    latitude: 37.8686, longitude: -122.267


    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

    37.8014, -122.448

    Posted in Engineering, Environment, KQED, Partners | Please Comment

    2007 Energy Bill a Mixed Bag

    January 11th, 2008 by Jim Gunshinan

    It would be easy to think that the 2007 Energy Bill, signed by President Bush at the end of last year, was all about automotive fuel economy. The legislation that requires fleet-wide average fuel economy for cars and light trucks to reach 35 miles per gallon by 2020 has generated a lot of buzz. On the negative side, the lack of strong support for renewable fuels such as wind and solar has generated some buzz as well. I cannot find anything in the Bill about renewing solar and conservation tax credits for homes, and that is a big, big omission.But there is a lot in the bill that is positive for residential buildings–not enough to tackle problems like our addiction to fossil fuel and the specter of climate change, but certainly a step in the right direction.

    Here are some home energy highlights, thanks to a summary of the bill by the Alliance to Save Energy, a nonprofit coalition of business, government, environmental, and consumer leaders:

    Appliance energy efficiency: The bill establishes new external power supply efficiency standards, based on the standards of California and other states; updates and creates new appliance efficiency standards and test procedures and provides for a regular review of those procedures; updates boiler efficiency standards and creates an electricity use standard for furnace fans; creates regional, climate-specific standards for furnaces, air conditioners, and heat pumps; requires DOE to include consideration of energy consumed while in standby mode for appliances already addressed by efficiency standards in their active mode; and directs the Federal Trade Commission to require energy labels for televisions, personal computer monitors, cable and set top boxes, and digital video recorders.

    Building efficiency: The 2007 Energy Bill directs DOE to set standards for manufactured housing that are at least as stringent as the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) national model code. There are also lots of provisions to increase the energy and water efficiency of government buildings and to create green building demonstration projects. The latter’s effect on housing? The government’s purchasing power moves whole industries–in this case it moves the building industry in the right direction.

    Lighting: The Energy Bill directs DOE to set performance standards for general-service light bulbs to achieve a 25%–­30% savings compared to incandescent bulbs by 2012–14. The bill also directs DOE to establish Bright Tomorrow Lighting prizes for the development of solid-state lighting.

    Green jobs: The Energy Bill authorizes a Department of Labor energy efficiency and renewable energy worker training program, and establishes within the Office of Solar Energy Technologies a grant program to create and strengthen solar-industry workforce training and internship programs for installation, operation, and maintenance of solar-energy devices.

    The bill also supports the recommendations offered by a group from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, including that of Home Energy Magazine Technical Editor Steve Greenberg, for greening the capitol complex, a set of buildings in Washington, D.C., including the Capitol, office buildings, and the capitol complex power plant. No mention is made of hot air energy recovery efforts from the chambers where Congress does its business.

    Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.

    latitude: 37.6871, longitude: -121.697


    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

    37.7772, -122.166595

    Posted in Engineering, Environment, Partners | Please Comment

    Next Page »