Posted on | September 25, 2011 | No Comments
Greetings from Washington DC, where I am visiting the 2011 Solar Decathlon. This year, the university teams have set up shop in West Potomac Park due to a conflict on the National Mall. The new location is slightly more difficult to get to but the journey is worth it… there are so many amazing things to see in these houses!
I brought my camera and have taken lots of photos but I managed to leave the cord for downloading the photos at home. Needless to say I will post pictures as soon as I return to Portland. I have seen 12 of the 19 houses so far, and they have had some amazing features:
- New Zealand’s “First Light” bach: an all western cedar holiday house with a refined, open interior
- Parsons / Stevens Empowerhouse: a house built for Habitat for Humanity of DC
- SCI-arc / CalTech’s CHIP: a house with blanket-like “outsulation”
- Team Belgium’s E-Cube: a pre-fab house with an IKEA-style assembly manual
- Team Canada’s TRTL: a tribal-inspired technological house
- University of Maryland’s Watershed: a lush, water-efficient home (& the current competition leader)
- Team Massachusetts’ 4D house: a spacious, livable home with a solar PV porch
- Team New Jersey’s ENJOY: a chic pre-cast concrete home with modern touches
- Team Florida’s Flexhouse: an open, airy home for Florida climates
- FIU’s perFORMDance House: an ADA-accessible home with hurricane louvers & copper cabinetry
- Tidewater Virginia’s Unit 6: a traditionally-styled, developer-ready home
- Appalachian University’s Solar Homestead: a modern home built with modules around a central outdoor pavilion… probably my favorite so far
I will talk more about the particulars of these houses once I have absorbed them all (and then again when I have photos). If you are in the area, these are definitely worth a trip! If you are around, you can probably find me tweeting about what house I am visiting… come find me @theGDC with the hashtag #SD2011.
Posted on | May 23, 2011 | No Comments
Last week was our penultimate topic week in the Sustainable Buildings class, and it was an important one: we covered the Living Building Challenge, one of the “deepest green” sustainable building standards in the world. It was even more appropriate a topic when you consider that it was started in our own backyard in conjunction with the Cascadia Green Building Council, and originally conceived by Jason F. McLennan, CEO of Cascadia. It is now administered by the International Living Future Institute (formerly the International Living Building Institute) and there are currently three buildings in North America that have achieved full “Living status”.
One of the most important things to keep in context within the framework of this class is, how does this standard relate to the other systems, standards, and methodologies we’ve seen? Observe:
- ENERGY STAR: This government-sponsored system is used widely by building professionals and manufacturers. But, it is somewhat unwieldy with lots of checklists and tools and has been rejected in multiple jurisdictions for being too complicated.
- State programs and codes: There are too many of these to mention, and they range from prescriptive to performance, regulations to codes. Standards vary from place to place and can be quite helpful in certain areas – if you know how to take advantage of them.
- Architecture 2030: This organization sets ambitious goals but provides very little framework for how to get there.
- LEED: This large and dense standard has achieved what we might call “market transformation” due to its position as THE green building benchmark. But, to achieve certification you must wade through mounds of paperwork and fork out lots of money.
- Passive House: This simple and straightforward standard places a premium on high performance, but is perhaps not as comprehensive as some of the other systems.
In contrast, the Living Building Challenge asks the question, “what if every single act of design and construction made the world a better place?”. With the LBC, the ideal outcome IS the goal, and there are no choices about whether or not you follow the “imperatives”. If you are trying to reach Living status, you either “go big or go home”.
This brings me to our field trip last week, the last one of the quarter… we are so fortunate in Portland to live in a community that places such value on sustainable living. We have not just one but THREE Living Buildings in the works in the city of Portland! The Oregon Sustainability Center, when it is built, will likely be the greenest high-rise ever built and reassert Portland’s status as a global leader in the green design community. The Key Delta Living Building in North Portland will be a phenomenal resource to its community once it is fully transformed from the gas station it used to be. But, as great as those buildings will be, they are not built yet.
The Living Building that IS built, or I should say nearly finished, is the commons, a two-family home in SE Portland that is a labor of love for the brothers building it. Sticking to the integrity of the Living Building Challenge has been a – dare I say – challenge for the owners, but they have come a long way and will have one of the greenest houses in the land when they are done. We had a good time on this field trip, and even took a class picture!
Posted on | May 11, 2011 | 1 Comment
In class this week our topic is one of my favorite things, the Passive House standard. Started in Germany as “Passivhaus” roughly 20 years ago, and validated as a way to create buildings that use as much as 90% less energy than their code-built counterparts, this is a simple way of building more energy-efficient, sustainable structures. The gist of the Passive House standard is to build airtight buildings, with lots of insulation, reduce thermal bridging, and then ventilate, ventilate, ventilate! By building more airtight structures, we ensure that these buildings don’t lose as much heating or cooling energy through cracks or gaps in the walls… but we also must provide a ventilation system that brings in fresh air, to reduce the likelihood of mold growth and generally support human health.
In discussing the Passive House standard, we learned that there are probably as many as 25,000 Passive House structures all around the world, the majority of which are in Europe, and only a handful of which are in North America. One of these buildings is the Smith House in Urbana, Illinois, the first Passive House built in the U.S. in 2003 by Katrin Klingenberg, who literally wrote the book on Passive House. Another Passive House is the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Solar Decathlon house from 2009, also known as the Gable Home. This house came in second in the 2009 Decathlon to Team Germany, who won their second Decathlon in a row. We took this opportunity to talk about the technology and building science on display at the Solar Decathlon, and how great an event this is for green home designers and enthusiasts alike. You can see more photos and read about my thoughts from immediately after the last event here.
Finally we got to the issue of our field trip this week to the Everhart Passive House in SE Portland. The Everhart family has put a lot of time and effort into the retrofit of their house into a Passive House, and they are extremely generous for opening their home to our class. For Assignment #5, we’ll be modeling the Everhart home using the Recurve modeling tool. Students are encouraged to bring a tape measure and their sketchbooks, and to “divide and conquer” spaces in the home to find inputs for all the rooms in the most efficient way possible. See you at 10:30 on Thursday morning!
Posted on | April 29, 2011 | 2 Comments
This past Tuesday, we all got to see for the first time what buildings the students are modeling for their Term Projects, the primary objective of which is to evaluate a building’s energy consumption using three different methodologies. The students will then derive from this process a better understanding of that building’s interaction with its environment and come to some sort of decision about how “sustainable” that building is. With 20 students in the class, using three different tools, and only 10 weeks to complete the projects, we had a lot to talk about. Roughy 2/3 of the class is studying commercial buildings while the remainder are looking at residential structures. Students are using many of the tools depicted on the “energy modeling scale” here, and a few that don’t make an appearance on the scale. Nearly everyone ran into some complications with at least one of the tools, with the most common frustrations arising out of – by my unofficial count – eQUEST. Still, eQUEST is an industry standard and a byproduct of DOE2, so it is good for new energy modelers to get their “hands dirty” with it, so to speak.
One of the most common questions I heard from the students during the midterms was, “What are your expectations for us to come up with the right answer?” To which I say, this project and this class are not so much about getting THE right answer THE first time around, as it is about getting AN answer. The purpose of the term project is in fact to come up with multiple answers and then compare them with historical data to see how that building stacks up. Energy modeling tools are imperfect creations… no single entity has a lock on how to calculate the energy consumption of even the smallest home, let alone a large commercial building. So often, to paint a more accurate picture of a building’s energy consumption, we use multiple tools and then parse out what worked and what didn’t work. The good news is, working with multiple tools not only gives us results that we can compare, it also offers the students the opportunity to gain experience on programs they may have never had the chance to use before.
And so it came to pass that we had a mid-term review in an architecture school in which everyone was encouraged to keep experimenting and make mistakes! Which in eQUEST is very easy to do :) I am really pleased so far with the class’s investment in this project and happy to see the gears turning in their heads, especially since so many engineers and other building professionals think that architects “don’t care” about the systems and the energy consumption of the buildings that they design. Architects care, for sure, it’s just that often we aren’t given the means to understand and work with this information. Hopefully this class is a small but serious step on the road to changing that.
Posted on | April 19, 2011 | No Comments
Today in class we talked about Architecture 2030, which is a private organization started by Edward Mazria to, in their words, “achieve a dramatic reduction in the climate-change-causing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the Building Sector by changing the way buildings and developments are planned, designed and constructed.” Architecture 2030 is effectively trying to change the way buildings are built for the better, just like the ENERGY STAR program and many of the state and local programs that we covered in the previous weeks. However, the goals, strategy and the messaging are notably different. Architecture 2030 focuses on greenhouse gas reduction as a result of energy savings, while many federal and state programs place more emphasis on reducing energy and ultimately, costs.
This discussion of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions seemed like an appropriate time to talk about how they are calculated. Many of the tools and programs we are looking at in this class focus on energy consumption, but very few give outputs for GHG emissions. If someone wants to calculate these emissions, an understanding of how variable GHG emissions are is necessary. Following is a chart that gives rough averages for pounds of CO2 for each unit of energy measurement.
We talked a lot about tools and online resources that can calculate the estimated PV load for a building, once the energy consumption has been calculated. Students will likely find a lot of help in these tools for their Term Project requirements.
Finally we talked about the Field Trip, which is a tour on Thursday morning of the PECI offices at Portland’s very new First & Main building. Assignment #3 is to use the spreadsheet analysis tool to try to come up with “Level 1″ outputs. Some inputs students will be able to find on their own throughout the space, but some will not be obvious and will be given at the time of the field trip. This should also serve as a reminder that students wishing to receive input on their mid-terms from REAL energy modeling professionals will have a chance to do so during the field trip!
Posted on | April 13, 2011 | No Comments
In today’s lecture, we dialed down into discussing state and local programs and codes, after having discussed the breadth and reach of federal programs in last week’s class. There are many, many programs across the country, and even more codes and variations on codes in each jurisdiction. But, since we’re in Oregon, it’s fair to use what we have in this state as an example.
The Energy Trust of Oregon (ETO) is an organization funded by the public purpose charge of its 4 member Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs) – PGE, Pacific Power, NW Natural, and Cascade Natural Gas. This means that if you live in Oregon in one or more of these utility territories, there is a small charge on your bill each month which goes to funding ETO. This money, in turn, is used by ETO to achieve energy efficiency throughout these corresponding territories. But why? Primarily because energy efficiency is a resource, just like the energy itself… if we collectively save enough energy, that means we can postpone, or even avoid altogether, the building of a new power plant.
ETO runs many programs which serve nearly every imaginable building type. Among them are the New Commercial Buildings Program and the New Homes Program. Both of these use incentives to encourage (or entice, if you will) architects, builders, homeowners, realtors, and everyone else involved in the life of a building to build more efficiently. The New Homes Program, in particular, uses a metric called the Energy Performance Score (EPS) to describe the energy consumption, costs, and carbon emissions of a home. This is much like the benchmarking, or “labeling” for homes that we discussed in last week’s class. The EPS looks like this:
We then talked about codes, which – let’s be honest – are the LEAST bad that you can do. They are a minimum standard and as such, when you are talking about designing a sustainable building, you probably want to work harder than code. The good news is, there are now real codes for green building. For energy, there is the IECC, while for green construction, there is the IGCC (supported by the AIA, ASHRAE, ASTM, USGBC, IES, and others). In California, always ahead of the game, there is Title 24 and the recently adopted CALGREEN code.
All of this talk about state and local green building leads to our field trip this Thursday, which will be at 10:30 am the EcoFlats, 3951 N Williams, Portland, OR 97227. The EcoFlats built a sustainable new multi-family complex in North Portland in part with guidance and incentives from the Energy Trust. Assignment #2, then, is for the students to use the EcoFlats building as a “prototype” to do an energy model in either eQUEST or SketchUp with the EnergyPlus OpenStudio plug-in. eQUEST and EnergyPlus are both Department of Energy supported energy simulators, and it’s important that the students get some experience in one of these industry standards.
THEN we tried to do a demonstration of the EnergyPlus OpenStudio plug-in for SketchUp. This did not go as planned, possibly because the program is buggy on Macs, or just because it is clumsy to begin with. In lieu of the difficulty we encountered trying to get this plug-in to work, students who are able to actually get outputs from an energy model created with OpenStudio may get a “special prize” in next week’s class, if they can show us their work. Students who ran an eQUEST model and want to show us their work may also get a “special prize”.
Happy energy modeling! :o)
Posted on | April 5, 2011 | No Comments
In today’s class we discussed the various programs, standards, and incentives supported by the Federal Government to promote energy efficient, high performance and sustainable buildings. We started off by talking about funding… the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Agency receive substantial funding, but it’s only a fraction of what “other” agencies receive. Below is a graphic representation of the two agencies funding.
We went on to talk about the biggest programs administered by the EPA and DOE, including ENERGY STAR, WaterSense, BetterBuildings, Building America, and most recently, the DOE’s Home Energy Score. The Home Energy Score is the latest in a long line of attempts at “labeling” buildings or homes. Labels have been used for years successfully on things like food for nutritional information, and cars for miles per gallon, so labels for homes are often described using these analogies – a Home Energy Score describes the energy “content” (consumption) of a home in the same way that nutritional labels describe the energy content of food.
This Thursday we’ll be going on a field trip to the Water House, 1616 NE 140th, Portland, just north of Halsey. The Water House is the first WaterSense certified home in Portland, as well as an ENERGY STAR certified home and an Earth Advantage Platinum home. On this field trip, students will also be gathering information for Assignment #1: use the EnergySavvy online tool to create a basic energy label of the Water House. It is a good idea to go through the EnergySavvy portal once, say with your own house, to get used to the inputs the tool asks for. Once students have gone through the EnergySavvy online assessment tool, they are to take a screen shot or create a report of the results and put it in their assignment binder.
Our first field trip and our first real assignment! The EnergySavvy online tool is a great “icebreaker” to become familiar with the idea of gathering inputs for energy audits and energy modeling. Next week we’ll talk more about labeling within the context of state and local codes and programs.
Posted on | March 31, 2011 | No Comments
Because we won’t see results for Assignment #7 unless we start it now!
Assignment #7 is to sign up on the Web site EarthAid.com, to see how you use energy in your own dwelling, and to see if knowing how much energy you use will help you save it. We’ll all “friend” each other on EarthAid, get points, and try to earn rewards. At the end of the quarter, we’ll see how we did. Sign up for Earth Aid now using the link below:
(If that doesn’t work, click here)
On this, the last day of March, we are talking about energy modeling. Students in the class are assigned a term project in which they are to select one building and conduct a complete evaluation of it, including at least three different forms of energy modeling or assessment. They can pick any three, but a good strategy would be to pick at least one that they feel comfortable with, one that challenges them, and one that is entirely unlike the other two. For instance, if I were doing a very small building, I feel very comfortable using HEED for smaller structures, so I might pick that first; I find eQUEST incredibly challenging, plus it is an industry standard, so I would pick that one to become more familiar with it; and finally, I might use the spreadsheet analysis method to balance things out. If I were doing a larger building, I might try to use Google SketchUp with the Open Studio plug-in, since it uses DOE’s Energy Plus as its back end; I’d try Ecotect just to see if I could do it; and maybe I would use EnergyPro as my third, since it is more focused on systems and less on geometry.
There is no right or wrong method to achieving the results of the term project… but be strategic about which programs you pick, have a reason for picking them, and then do your best. If you encounter problems or don’t know what certain inputs mean, start a list of questions, and bring them to class with you. Students will have several opportunities throughout the quarter to ask questions of energy modeling “experts” and each other.
Here is a “scale” of energy modeling that we talked about today in class. There are definitely other types of modeling tools out there, and one of the objectives of this class is to let students try several of them and become familiar with the process of determining energy consumption of buildings.
Any questions? Let me know!
Posted on | March 29, 2011 | No Comments
Today marked a new chapter in my quest for greener buildings, in the life of this blog, and in the college careers of 15 or so students at the University of Oregon’s School of Architecture and Allied Arts. Today I started teaching a class called Assessing the Performance of Sustainable Buildings at OU’s Portland White Stag building. And I’m very excited! I’ll be using this space to talk about the class, what we’re covering, and logistics of our various assignments and field trips.
Since it was our first day of class, we did introductions, played the “what school did you attend for undergrad?” game, and I asked what the students favorite building was. A couple of them were so stunned by this question that they were rendered speechless. LOL. But it was fine. I heard that a lot of the students are interested in Renzo Piano, Carlo Scarpa, Herzog & De Meuron, and Antoni Gaudi. Gaudi is, in fact, one of my favorite architects of all time, and I volunteered that Sagrada Familia is one of my favorite buildings:
However, in this class, we are going to be looking at buildings a little closer to home. Buildings that we can really explore, pick apart, understand, and most importantly, buildings that we can energy model. Can you imagine trying to conduct an energy assessment of Sagrada Familia? No, neither can I! I don’t even know that this structure will be enclosed in our lifetime. But, some of the greatest buildings in history took many centuries to build, and are still standing today. Haven’t these buildings withstood the tests of time? Can’t these also be considered sustainable?
The schedule for the class includes several field trips with associated assignments, and a term project, which will constitute the bulk of the student’s “outside of class” work. For the term project, the students can select any building in Portland (or elsewhere, if a sufficient case is made) to evaluate and conduct an assessment of. Students have the option of selecting something off of the list of LEED Certified buildings in Portland (of which there are many) or picking their own building. The only off-limits buildings are those which are field trip destinations (greyed out on the spreadsheet).
Thursday morning’s class, we’ll be covering energy modeling! Soon we’ll have a class full of expert energy modelers :)
Posted on | January 2, 2011 | No Comments
If there are any of you out there actually reading still, I clearly fell off the face of the earth for the last 4 months of 2010. It was a hectic and crazy time at the office and I really only had energy for the work that I do with, well, energy.
That said, I would like to reimagine the GDC with an eye on how it can contribute more to the green economy. But how? I am frustrated by the down economy and wish there was something I could to do to help connect the under-employed with innovative jobs in the green sector. There is still so much work to be done! This lack of an ability to connect the dots was another reason why I struggled with blogging… what if I don’t have anything to say? What if I feel that I have nothing to contribute when I can’t provide the one thing that many people want, which is employment?
It is a question that I will seek to answer in 2011, and hopefully I will be back soon to tell you about it. Until then, thanks for stopping by.keep looking »