A Realistic Look at Energy Challenges

That sounds like a good book.

I hope it doesn't sound like I'm using scare tactics or bias. But I think that we not only have to look at ways to replace our current major dirty sources of energy, but that a major reduction in our consumption has to be a big part of the equation also.

This will not only make our current resources last longer, but it will enable an ever growing population to live relatively comfortable lives, with each person consuming perhaps 1/3 of the energy that we use today...............maybe less.

AMEN!!! Asia discovered "Energy Reduction" years ago and has actually done something about it! Here in the States we are the last to embrace this obvious solution. We (TTC) have been providing this conservation solution for the last few years, but it is not as "Glamorous" as the other "Energy Solutions". Hopefully, times are changing and we are finally discovering "Conservation"!!!

Agreed, here in the US, we're not only looking for a "Glamorous Solution" but the easiest solution possible to our pockets and personal labor involved. We want a no-brainer solution and in the meanwhile, other countries are ahead of the game with far less monetary and technical resources. It seems we require the right "Jones's" to lead the front.

We need the bring the "crying American Indian" back...

Great Idea! Maybe I should solicit a copy of this Indian into our website as a flash greeting!

Maybe then clients will stop and think about what they are doing by NOT conserving Energy!!!

We should have been doing this a long time ago. I would love to have a $20 electric bill year round.

http://www.househunting.ca/eco/story.html?id=aaeaa0c1-5aab-495e-83f0-0caebf73dd5c

The neighbors are mad because Mr. Hnatko doesn't mow his house often enough

Back in 1974, my wife and I had a tour of an underground house that was built by the University of Minnesota.

There are a small number of these houses around. Very quiet since there is limited exposure to outside noises.

Thanks for sparking that memory.

I can't help but think about how nice our ugly subdivisions would look if all the houses were like this. A road going in, but other than that, just rolling hills of tall grass and trees.

NO LAWNMOWERS!!!!!

I have a 2 horsepower mower

I wonder what he does when the Red River floods.

All over Manitoba, we have what is known as "flood inches" and houses have to be built high enough to withstand the once in a century flood. (Well, if you want to get insurance on them...there is no code requirement that I could find. I had to build to suit the flood inches requirement when I lived there....but it may have been a municipal regulation.)

What I like best is the grass. So it is a darned pretty way to build. However (lest I damn with faint praise) earth sheltering requires some very special building techniques. Manitoba is not like the UK....where you can build nutty but cute buildings like this one. Most earth sheltered houses will cost a lot to insulate and maintain, but there is a fair amount of planning which you can do to deal with it. It is NOT intuitive. (google citation here.). Interestingly enough, the University of Manitoba came up with a method of building known as "R-2000", a style which will result in your 20 dollar energy bill IF you follow it. And an R-2000 house is not normally earth sheltered.

All in all, with some slight reservations, I tend to like this house.

I would tend to go the opposite way & be looking for passive cooling

we have 4 seasons, but the summer is longer...

My brother lives in a house built from hay bales and covered with adobe...................................very energy efficient.

If someone has the money, the underground dwellings can get pretty nice.

Check this one out.

here's a couple from a house dug out of the central valley hard pan

It is stunning, good, form follows function design. It needs a perfect storm of slope, light, and space to come together, and the result is really interesting. But I would not call it "phenomonal and forward thinking" as the link did. Luke Skywalker's house on Tatooine was better, and that was, what a quarter century ago? (for that matter, JRR Tolkein had his hobbits living in earth sheltered houses. Such a house requires a huge carbon footprint to create, and I don't know how they expect to heat all those glass walls. It does not "fit in" to the neighbourhood, and would be rejected by virtually ANY city planning or community group in the world...I bet the neighbours demanded those ugly afterthought fences around the top, say perhaps after a death or near miss? So this design was fundamentally unsafe. That is not good design in my book.

Instead of placing his house in a city, and leaving the countryside for the goat farmers, this fellow has moved to a place which requires a car to get in or out, and he STILL had to build a garage to park his car. So it perpetuates the "house in the suburbs" which has brought us to the brink of "peak oil".

I know, I sound really negative. It is easy to be critical afterwards. But honestly, I don't see the point of this house. The only positive I can figure out is that it uses ambient light to excellent advantage. Somebody was on the ball when they were given the job of "design a house nestled into a hill that doesn't feel closed in". A difficult media, a difficult design job. The best possible result to an almost impossible set of design criteria. My hat is off to the architect. He or she has shown that you don't have to live in a cave to live in an earth sheltered house.

This home does not address the problem of this thread....the "realistic look at Energy challenges". I wonder if the hobbits village would have done so....grin!

How about a more traditional design?

http://www.visitmesaverde.com/mesa-verde-tours.aspx?ctt_id=4144936&ctt_adnw=Google&ctt_ch=ps&ctt_entity=tc&ctt_cli=1x15832x40061x954200&ctt_kw=mesa%20verda%20national%20park&ctt_adid=5308016514&ctt_nwtype=search&gclid=CL6L_dWuqaoCFSN5gwodInJwYQ

Yes, that would be lovely. High density, close to amenities, a village of like minded individuals with a VERY low carbon footprint. You know they left there when the water dried up hmmmm?

sorry I forgot the link for my earlier post on the underground garden

http://www.undergroundgardens.com/

a longer view of Mesa Verde

community planning should be part of the energy discussion

"What will be the future of the energy industry". (yeah...that really WAS the original question on this thread!!!) My crystal ball is a little hazy right now. But lets see what I can see....

The energy industry is divided up into sectors. Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Hydro, Big Nuclear, Big Wind, Big Solar, Big Natural Gas and a few others. All of these sectors compete with each other. The goal of all these sectors is not to serve the public, or further an energy wasteful agenda, but simply to make money. They can make money in only two ways, same as any industry, and those ways are to charge more for their services, or to produce their product for less. Any technology which will reduce demand for any of these products will be looked upon unfavorably, and possibly be actively resisted. Oil interests for instance will work against the adoption of an electric car either actively (buying up patents or purchasing controlling stock) or passively (producing a better or cheaper product than their electricity producing competitors)

As the oil becomes depleted (I mean, honestly, how many more cubic miles of oil do you THINK there left anyway? ) the price of oil will rise just as any commodity price will rise when demand exceeds supply. Alternative energy supplies will not become cheaper, just less expensive than oil....so oil will not be able to compete on the basis of price. They will need to compete on a more active, hands on basis. Don't forget, it is in their best interests to keep the price of ALL energy as high as possible in order to maximize their profits. So Big Oil will work to control all other forms of energy in order to make them less competitive. Below is the support for this statement...it is a cut and paste from this link. ("Total" is the French energy giant btw)

On 29 April 2011, Total agreed to buy 60% of photovoltaics company SunPower for US$1.38 billion.[

The only thing which will keep the oil industry (or the nuclear industry or whatever) from snapping up all the other energy industries is a distrust of a natural competitor. This link shows the infighting which goes on among these VERY competitive industries.

I totally do not agree with Patrick O'Conner's view that only Big Government (presumably big O'Conner government) can control Big Oil simply because I don't believe that a big socialist government has MY best interests at heart either. However, his essay on the failure of Big Business to ensure the safety of millions of people in the face of earthquakes and radiation leaks in Japan (among others) makes for sobering reading. He feels that the future of the energy industry lies in a political solution. Lets all hope that it does not...I personally have not often seen the political solution to be the best possible answer. (Though sometimes it can be...the post office for instance....)

So what role does government have with regards to the future of the energy industry? Well, it COULD increase funding for alternative energy development, which despite some mixed messages, may be happening, though it has been getting less and less since 1980.

As energy costs continue to soar, the only alternatives will be a sort of consumer revolt. We saw the rising cost of energy almost stall the US and Canadian economy a year ago, and it took a sudden market "correction" downward to head off the sudden overnight adoption of alternative fuels. Some folks are refusing to play along with Big Oil, and are jumping on the alternative fuel band wagon. Hydrogen, alcohol, biodiesel, even steam (and yes, coffee grounds!). These technologies are in their infancy and so far are VERY expensive. But development will continue in these areas. However, most development seems to be in the area of making automobiles more fuel efficient. It is not working, and therefore is not worth considering. Electric cars are simply not the answer either. Thought they come close, you have to consider that every summer the electrical system nearly overloads from air conditioners, what do you think will happen when you add a couple of million batteries to charge every night? Although I do happen to believe that the electric car is the answer to peak oil. You can at least convert to electric without breaking the bank. But it will not reduce the size of that cubic mile of oil!

Damn...my crystal ball just broke...just when it was going to show the technological breakthrough which would allow us all to continue to squander energy like we have been doing for the last 60 years. Well, I guess it will be up to you engineers to come up with that solution. Myself, I think the answer is in moving sidewalks, work at home programs, bamboo bicycles and maglev trains. None of which will boost the stock in oil companies, so don't get your hopes up. The energy companies will fight among themselves until there is only one left standing. THEN our problems will BEGIN!