What does it take to succesfully transition to a green energy economy?

[Blumlein 88]

http://cchrc.org/media/ASHP_SE_Report.pdf

Report a few years ago on their use in different parts of Alaska. 108 pages.

My guess would be if natural gas is available in these very cold climates you would be better off with the gas or certainly having it to help in the coldest days. As with many commercial products getting right on the edge of performance is sometimes not a great idea. OTOH, lots of places where people think of old heat pump issues those have been banished and heat pumps are pretty nice.

@Doodski
So what kind of heat do you have?

 

[Doodski]

http://cchrc.org/media/ASHP_SE_Report.pdf

Report a few years ago on their use in different parts of Alaska. 108 pages.

My guess would be if natural gas is available in these very cold climates you would be better off with the gas or certainly having it to help in the coldest days. As with many commercial products getting right on the edge of performance is sometimes not a great idea. OTOH, lots of places where people think of old heat pump issues those have been banished and heat pumps are pretty nice.

@Doodski
So what kind of heat do you have?

Presently it is hydronic. Previous it was natural gas forced air and some time ago in BC where the electricity expense is very low it was electric baseboards. I like electric baseboards it produces heat with a small temp delta and each room can be tuned individually. The hydronic is nice too but it is slow to react to changes I think.

 

[JaMaSt]

Arctic Heat Pumps | Cold Climate Air-to-Water Hydronic Systems

Slash heating bills up to 75% with Arctic Heat Pumps! Premium air-to-water hydronic systems for floors, pools & hot water to -30°C. Get a custom design.

www.arcticheatpumps.com

These claim to work down to -22F or -30C.

Interesting post. I'll look into that system.

FWIW, my education/training is architecture (20 years in traditional practice) and 7+ years as a general contractor/architect working for a real estate developer. I'm managing 5 developments which, when built-out, will have around 30 buildings and 45 ~ 50 commercial tenants. I'm responsible for the expenditure of around $100,000,000 in construction.

Conventional heat pumps (mini-splits with ERVs) do work in the Pacific Northwest (west of the Cascades) and add between $13,000 to $27,000 to the cost an average tenant build-out (1,200 sf to 2,000 sf). This gets passed along to the tenant as an increased $/SF lease rate. 95% of our tenants are mom-and-pop businesses. Also, ERVs also don't have a great track record for longevity.

On July 1st, the Washington State Energy Code will no longer allow electrical resistance or natural gas heating. I'm rushing to get 6 buildings in for permit before that.

What's ludicrous about this is that Western Washington State (west of the Cascade Mountains) is classified as a 4C Marine Climate Zone - many people don't even have air conditioning (I didn't for 25 years) and yet we have the most restrictive energy code in the nation. It's never too hot or too cold for any extended period of time.

To make matters worse, electrical utility districts are required to increase the amount of "sustainable" energy they generate - and hydroelectric power (the Bonneville dam on the Columbia River provides a huge % of the electricity in the region) is no longer considered "sustainable". Electrical utilities districts are being forced to develop wind farms which operate at around 50% of capacity and have very short life spans compared to coal, gas and hydro - meaning that additional energy will have to be expended in manufacturing replacement parts. Parts built with rare earth minerals strip-mined and imported from China.

And as I posted above, China is opening 1 to 2 coal plants a week, and have been doing so for the last 10 years - with no end in sight.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Interesting post. I'll look into that system.

FWIW, my education/training is architecture (20 years in traditional practice) and 7+ years as a general contractor/architect working for a real estate developer. I'm managing 5 developments which, when built-out, will have around 30 buildings and 45 ~ 50 commercial tenants. I'm responsible for the expenditure of around $100,000,000 in construction.

Conventional heat pumps (mini-splits with ERVs) do work in the Pacific Northwest (west of the Cascades) and add between $13,000 to $27,000 to the cost an average tenant build-out (1,200 sf to 2,000 sf). This gets passed along to the tenant as an increased $/SF lease rate. 95% of our tenants are mom-and-pop businesses. Also, ERVs also don't have a great track record for longevity.

On July 1st, the Washington State Energy Code will no longer allow electrical resistance or natural gas heating. I'm rushing to get 6 buildings in for permit before that.

What's ludicrous about this is that Western Washington State (west of the Cascade Mountains) is classified as a 4C Marine Climate Zone - many people don't even have air conditioning (I didn't for 25 years) and yet we have the most restrictive energy code in the nation. It's never too hot or too cold for any extended period of time.

To make matters worse, electrical utility districts are required to increase the amount of "sustainable" energy they generate - and hydroelectric power (the Bonneville dam on the Columbia River provides a huge % of the electricity in the region) is no longer considered "sustainable". Electrical utilities districts are being forced to develop wind farms which operate at around 50% of capacity and have very short life spans compared to coal, gas and hydro - meaning that additional energy will have to be expended in manufacturing replacement parts. Part built with rare earth minerals strip-mined and imported from China.

And as I posted above, China is opening 1 to 2 coal plants a week, and have been doing so for the last 10 years.....

Wow, that sounds crazy. So are heat pumps all the heating they will allow after this new code goes into effect? And hydro is not sustainable? Insanity.

I agree on China, what we do in the USA matters little for global emissions because of China and India.

 

[JaMaSt]

So are heat pumps all the heating they will allow after this new code goes into effect?

Heat pumps, VRF (variable refrigerant flow) and DCV (demand control ventilation) systems. If you install a VRF system, you still have to install a parallel DOAS (dedicated outdoor air system) for fresh air distribution, an ERV (energy recovery ventilation system). These don't have a great track record for longevity and will need to be replaced way too soon (more wasted energy consumption in manufacturing, and filling up landfills). And ERVs are horrible for a part of the Country which rains more than half the days of the year (they recover both latent and SENSIBLE heat). I've had tenants turn them off completely when it's too humid (imagine that, humid in a Pacific Northwest Rainforest...).

 

[Doodski]

Parts built with rare earth minerals

Some are coming from Canada and the USA in time like maybe 2-3 years from what I read. The government has made it a priority, money is flowing/investment now and the mapping of deposits is done already too. So we should be able to relax a bit in time. Canada has rare earths but not enough for a long long time from what I read. President Biden was in Canada maybe 10 days ago and he said we will together make this a priority and the Canadian federal gov has jumped on the task.

 

[julian_hughes]

"What does it take to successfully transition to a green energy economy?"

Poverty. Necessity. Political compulsion.

I'm not being flippant. People are parsimonious only when it's necessary. When we feel wealthy we don't care about waste. For example, recycling in wealthy societies is done by injunction, obligation, compulsion. In societies which are not wealthy then "green" habits are the norm, as they have been for 99% of people for 99% of forever since time began. In wealthy societies we will resist every attempt to force us to behave in ways which inconvenience us, and that includes moving to renewable energy. The day that renewable energy is both more reliable and cheaper is the day we will change our minds. Meanwhile in societies and nations with less choice then people will take what they can get, green or not. In short, it's a market and market forces apply. We can somewhat modify those forces by political action and choice but we can't negate them.

 

[JaMaSt]

Some are coming from Canada and the USA in time like maybe 2-3 years from what I read. The government has made it a priority, money is flowing/investment now and the mapping of deposits is done already too. So we should be able to relax a bit in time. Canada has rare earths but not enough for a long long time from what I read. President Biden was in Canada maybe 10 days ago and he said we will together make this a priority and the Canadian federal gov has jumped on the task.

But - respectively Doodski - you aren't addressing the underlying long-term inefficiency of the systems, and the energy which will be expended in replacing them, compared to typical dx (direct expansion systems) with economizers. As you might guess, I follow this very closely and have reviewed many studies. The science is not there.

Edit: The issue for buildings revolves around the efficiency and long term energy benefits of heat pumps with ERVs vs traditional dx systems.

 

[Doodski]

But - respectively Doodski - you aren't addressing the underlying long-term inefficiency of the systems, and the energy which will be expended in replacing them, compared to typical dx (direct expansion systems) with economizers. As you might guess, I follow this very closely and have reviewed many studies. The science is not there.

I've thought about this and it's a stumbling block for sure. It's going ahead whether people are onboard or not so might as well be gung ho about it and get 'er done. It's a massive undertaking for sure, the money req'd is huge and it's not easy to see the end in sight. I don't think this transition will be complete in my lifetime but I think it will eventually get done. Other than me trying to have a positive outlook I believe you and I sense you have a lot of knowledge on the matter.

 

[TonyJZX]

i dont think any of us will live to see it

this will only happen if you have a complete revolution in energy production

where you have a cheapish safe-ish green-ish form of energy that will obsolete other conventional alternatives overnight

you know where i'm going with this

can you imagine the social upheaval? trillion dollar multinationals and oil states teetering on the edge... i'd love to see it... i doubt i will ever see it

 

[Blumlein 88]

i dont think any of us will live to see it

this will only happen if you have a complete revolution in energy production

where you have a cheapish safe-ish green-ish form of energy that will obsolete other conventional alternatives overnight

you know where i'm going with this

can you imagine the social upheaval? trillion dollar multinationals and oil states teetering on the edge... i'd love to see it... i doubt i will ever see it

Energy transitions don't happen that way. Nor would that kind of upheaval be a bed of roses. Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Marc v E]

But - respectively Doodski - you aren't addressing the underlying long-term inefficiency of the systems, and the energy which will be expended in replacing them, compared to typical dx (direct expansion systems) with economizers. As you might guess, I follow this very closely and have reviewed many studies. The science is not there.

Edit: The issue for buildings revolves around the efficiency and long term energy benefits of heat pumps with ERVs vs traditional dx systems.

Are the direct expansion systems you mentioned airconditioner systems with air-air heat pumps ? (I'm not familiar with the term dx systems.)

Those airconditioning units with air-air heatpumps are about €2000 for an installed unit of 5kw, which equates to enough heating and cooling capacity for a room of about 70 m2 ( info from an installer and a friend). Savings are about a third to halving gas use, which equates to an return on investment 2 or 3 years.

The heat pumps that are designed to replace central heating are expensive. Where I live the upfront cost is about €15000. The roi used to be around 15 years.

That's why, I think, many are still waiting to change, unless they have to.

 

[Willem]

@TonyJZX I don't think we have an alternative. The cost and disruption of not doing what is needed will be much greater than acting now. And acting fast wil be cheaper than waiting. As for oil states: the Netherlands were one of those, with massive reserves of natural gas. Exploitation has now been terminated because of the earth quakes from pumping up the gas. Fortunately we are still one of the most prosperous countries in the world. Our biggest challenge may well be to deal with rising sea levels. A recent large scale study showed that we can cope with a 2 meter rise, even if that will be expensive. So my country is now beginning to plan for that. Other countries may not be so fortunate that they have the money and the expertise. Even for us, a five meter rise will create real problems, however.

 

[Willem]

When the flat roof of our large house built in 1998 started leaking almost twee years ago, we realized that the moment had come to do what we knew had to be done: improving the existing roof insulation to modern levels (R=6.0). In order to get a subsidy for this, we also had to improve the crawl space insulation from R=2.5, the mandatory requirement when the house was built. We upgraded to R=7.5. The total cost of all this, net of subsidy, was some 20k euro, of which perhaps half or a bit more was for the insulation part of the project. I can roughly calculate that we saved some third on natural gas for heating. At current prices that represents about 1200 euros a year. In short, the investment was worth it, and all the more since it was funded by a cheap and easy (2%) government subsidized loan. It also increased comfort.
The next stage of our project is to get a full electric heat pump, but supplies are limited and we may have to wait for another year. We are lucky that by now the already quite well insulated house is even better insulated. Our current double glazing is pretty good high efficiency double glazing, but not quite up to the highest modern standards, so we will upgrade that when the current glass needs replacement. Doing such things when something has to be done anyway (as with our roof) is the most economical way to proceed, of course. We also already had floor heating, which makes low temperature heating systems such as heat pumps more feasible.
So by and large I am far from pessimistic. Much of the technology exists and is pretty economical to implement. Of course, the transition needs mandatory standards such as in building, legislation, and investment in infrastructure, but all that is quite feasible. The economist in me is pleased to see that the market mechanism of high energy prices and rapidly declining costs of wind and solar power are good incentives. Of course, this is not to deny the challenges on our way, one of which is to ensure that those on low incomes are not left behind.

 

[Martin]

Public want and industrial supply. Government mandates never work.

Can you imagine the uproar if the government had mandated in 1905 that everyone had to stop using horses and could only buy motor cars after 1920.

It took Henry Ford and his Model T to fill public wants to basically fulfill that hypothetical mandate. And horses continued to be used for many more years in rural areas.

Tesla is the modern equivalent to Ford and the Model T. Let the market decide and we’ll have a more viable future.

Martin

 

[Marc v E]

i dont think any of us will live to see it

this will only happen if you have a complete revolution in energy production

where you have a cheapish safe-ish green-ish form of energy that will obsolete other conventional alternatives overnight

you know where i'm going with this

can you imagine the social upheaval? trillion dollar multinationals and oil states teetering on the edge... i'd love to see it... i doubt i will ever see it

I think I understand the point you're making: no one is going to make the change voluntarily. Especially not if they have a vested interest in things staying the way they are. Making billions in oil or in producing ice cars, for example.

I see your point. But, for the first time in decades, I really believe things are changing. There was huge resistance to electric cars, probably for the reason stated above, but that is beginning to change.

There are now ev companies that make money, which means they'll stay. Ford has committed its whole existence to evs. Mercedes is also making progress. "Total Energies", a French oil business similar to Shell or BP, sold off all its gas stations in Europe. They foresee an electric future.

It's the biggest companies of today who resist the change most. I heard from a friend in the car industry that it's a well known phenomenon. He recommended the book "The Innovators Dilemma".

 

[PHD]

It takes many people's jobs away...

 

[Willem]

Government mandates never work.

This quite simply not true. Health and safety standards have improved life for many, for example. It is textbook economics that the market will not solve everything. It is the stories of private vs pubic returns, externalities and the free rider problem.

 

[Willem]

It takes many people's jobs away...

The new green technology is creating a lot of new jobs. The green transition is not cheap, so by definition that is business. What is true is that some jobs will be lost, and new jobs will be created. That is what innovation looks like. It is what the economist Schumpeter called the gales of creative destruction, and it is characteristic of capitalism and its successes.

 

[Gorgonzola]

When that happens the transition will happen automatically.

As of now, "green" energy needs subsidies and rich and upper-middle class people buy Teslas (as a 2nd or 3rd car) and these are the same people who can afford solar panels.

And then the Tesla is usually charged with natural gas or coal. The best and biggest source of renewable energy is hydro power and building new big dams is out of the question in the U.S.

Nukes, man, think nukes. We either need nuclear for base power or we need hugely better storage mechanisms and capacity.

Where I live nuclear is already the biggest source of electricity production. Ontario electrical energy sources, 2016 ...