What is Digg?22 Comments
- Brotoi, on 07/19/2009, -0/+6
Why would a site like Treehugger be so critical of this project? There is a lot more to it than underground heat pumps and although better windows and insulation would make a dramatic improvement in any house built before 1990 or so, that one improvement alone would not be sufficient to achieve the levels proposed for this project (which, by the way, includes both).
I find it very odd that a environmental advocacy website would be so critical of a concentrated effort to build a more environmentally friendly home. Would they prefer returning us all to the Middle Paleolithic? - MadEnvoy, on 07/19/2009, -0/+4"GE says that the net-zero energy house will cost 10% more than a conventional house" - I can't even afford a conventional house.
- skipvt, on 07/19/2009, -0/+3You can cook on neon tubes now?
- wherley, on 07/19/2009, -0/+2Zero Energy homes have been around a little while - one in Lakeland FL since 1998:
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/research/buildings/zero ... - huxrules, on 07/19/2009, -0/+2Because it's easier to bitch on an environmental website than go get your EE degree and join GE.
Although that said I doing think they bitched too much- they just pointed out that if you lived in northern germany you could buy a house that was well insulated. Which is great because it has no bearing on houses in the US (most of which require A/C). - tomarocco, on 07/19/2009, -2/+4All Green is a scam.
- inactive, on 07/19/2009, -0/+2All these technologies work on larger scale projects too -- schools, housing complexes, office buildings, hospitals, etc. I'm sure the economies of scale could make the investment seem a lot more attractive.
- goodgifts, on 07/19/2009, -0/+1Common sense and a bit of research seems to be in order before we rush to purchase or support any new or costly energy saving ideas. There are many excellent energy efficient methods in use already and every individual needs to weigh for themselves cost versus return on investment. Right now I think we all need to be encouraged to do something no matter how simple or high tech to cut our personal energy use.
- morcheeba, on 07/19/2009, -0/+1I thought this was going to be about the energy efficient GE calculator I just read about: http://tinyurl.com/nmb46n
- anonymousmedic, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1Neat idea. Now who's going to pay for it? The majority of people living in energy inefficient homes are the ones who cannot afford new, shiney homes built for zero-net energy usage.
- marinist, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1"the construction industry already has on hand, but has largely failed to deploy, the tools to make homes and other buildings much more energy efficient than they typically are today."
After studying the subject of green homes, existing structures are best made "green" by reducing energy loss due to air escape and poor insulation. Easily over half of the homes in the US fail on that note. For new builds, the "green" approach is very specific on local environment. Gadgets are fun, but let's get to the basics first--then decide if GE's gizmos are warranted. Here's a basic idea: don't design a home for Minneapolis like one in Phoenix. Yet many national builders use poorly conceived cookie-cutter approach for developments in disparate climates--why?? Start with good design, and supplement with technology without needlessly complicating maintenance, etc. - datatribe, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1Insulation and orientation is right - 40 years ago a builder was documented in New Shelter magazine making walls for houses just twice as thick with no conducting members (studs were alternated between the interior and exterior walls). What his design lacked in aesthetics, it made up for in R-value and cost of ownership. It wouldn't take much to make that design standard and more appealing. There's a book by a builder out of New England, titled (I think) The Solar Home which covers the topic of siting and orientation well. Unfortunately, McMansions typically have little option on orientation on their postage stamp sized building plots. But anyone with at least 3/4 of an acre can fit a reasonably nice home with proper southward orientation (for N hemisphere) and can follow the design principles of minimal north facing glass, thermal mass foundation air circulation and more.
We've hand the materials for well over 100 years - and the methods for three decades. None of it requires gadgetry. - spriggig, on 07/19/2009, -1/+2This is greenwashing aimed at politicians. It'd be nice if the public bought it too, but that's not really GE's agenda here.
- anthropodeus, on 07/19/2009, -0/+1anyone else think the black and hellfire-red oven and stove look kind of ominous?
- Dealjobber, on 07/19/2009, -0/+1Can't wait to ruin that monitor that's sitting right next (and slightly over) that stove whenever I fry some eggs.
- aenilius, on 07/19/2009, -5/+5The article clearly tells the reader to spend the cash on better insulation and windows instead of gimmicky tech crap.
Tell GE I said lol. - bobbknight, on 07/19/2009, -1/+1When I get a rich as algor I will get me one of these houses.
- deema1, on 07/19/2009, -2/+2Thanks but no thanks. I gave up on buying GE a few months ago when they sold out their last shred of integrity.
- JLMEALER, on 07/22/2009, -0/+0GE.. didn't they provide Iran and Iraq with IEDs???
Mealer Companies LLC
America's Next Major Automaker and Green Energy Source Provider!
http://mealercompanies.com - goodinohio, on 07/19/2009, -8/+7Scam.
- GaltShrugged, on 07/19/2009, -6/+4GE Sucks.
- 4AntiStupid, on 07/19/2009, -3/+1That's easy. Many "environmentalist" are actually socialist and using it as an excuse to take away individual rights. Ever wonder why May Day is full of environmentalist demonstrations? Science and effective solutions diminish that excuse.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is