Nuclear Weapons Plant Going "Green"

The picture above (from the website nukewatch.org) is of Pantex -- the plant where all United States nuclear weapons are assembled (and out-dated nukes are dismantled). The plant is in the Texas Panhandle, just a few miles from Amarillo.

For years now, this huge nuclear weapons plant has sucked up a significant portion of the electrical energy produced in this area. It looks like that is going to change soon. Acting on instructions from the White House for government agencies to develop homegrown energy and cut carbon pollution, the Pantex plant will break ground for a huge new wind farm in just a few days.

The wind farm will save the plant (and the federal government) about $2.8 million dollars each year in energy costs -- and that money will be used to pay for the construction (which means it won't add to the budget deficit or the national debt). It will cover about 1500 acres, and will produce  about 47 million kilowatt hours of energy each year (enough energy to supply the needs of about 3,500 homes). It will also reduce the amount of CO2 emissions by more than 35,000 metric tons each year (the equivalent of removing 7,200 cars from service).

I'm still not thrilled to have a nuclear weapons assembly plant near the city where I live, but if it has to be there, I'm at least glad they are making an effort to be a good neighbor -- by producing their own energy from a renewable and clean resource, and by lowering the pollution their energy use is responsible for. Pantex is going green -- and that's a good thing.

"Passivhaus" - Uncommon, But Shouldn't Be

The new building above doesn't look like anything special, but it is. It is Seattle's first permanent building designed to meet the Passivhaus standard, which means it will use 70% to 90% less energy than buildings constructed using normal standards.

Now you may think it requires some kind of high-tech solution to achieve that much energy savings. It doesn't. It is actually pretty simple to do, and could be done by any competent builder. All it requires is three ingredients:
1. Highly insulated walls and windows.
2. A tightly sealed envelope.
3. Heat recovery ventilation.

There are already over 25,000 homes built to the Passivhaus standard in Europe -- mostly in Germany. The building above did cost about 10% more in construction costs, but in Germany (where they have some experience in this type of construction) the additional cost runs about 5% to 8%. The beauty of this is that the small extra building cost is quickly recovered by the huge savings in energy. Just think of how much could be saved by cutting gas and/or electric bills by 70% to 90%.

The house above doesn't even have a furnace. It can easily be heated by a couple of small baseboard electric heaters that would only have to be used on very cold days (and then for only short periods of time). Most of the time the house would be sufficiently heated by the excess heat from appliances, from people, and from sunshine coming in through the windows. The heat recovery ventilator does have to run 24-7 when the windows are closed, but it only draws about as much electricity as a 50 watt bulb.

Now some of you may be saying that since you live in the South and Southwest where the winters aren't too bad, this kind of construction wouldn't be as valuable. Not true. The house can keep in cool air as easily as it does warm air -- meaning an air conditioner (preferably a very efficient one) would have to be used for only short and infrequent periods of time. This house saves on energy costs all year.

So why aren't all new homes and other buildings constructed using the Passivhaus standard? That's a very good question. Using this construction method would not only save owners a ton of money in energy costs, once they became numerous they would be an important part of energy conservation for the country as a whole -- meaning far less dirty and polluting electric power plants would be needed to heat and cool them (which would be important since the U.S. seems determined to keep using coal to produce electricity). It would also reduce the need for natural gas and heating oil.

If we were a smarter country, we would require all new construction that could to use the Passivhaus standard. But don't hold your breath for that to happen in the United States. That would reduce the need for oil, gas and coal. And our politicians are far too busy protecting the corporations supplying these energy sources. They are not about to do anything that would reduce the need for these carbon-based and environmentally-damaging fuels.

There are those who say that renewable energy sources (like wind energy, wave energy, solar energy, etc.) could never supply our total energy needs. That may or may not be true, but if we built much more efficient buildings and drove much more efficient cars and used other conservation methods we might be able to do it.

It's too bad that our politicians are more interested in protecting corporate profits than they are in solving our energy problems. Many of the solutions, like Passivhaus, are already out there. All we need is the moral and political will to begin using them.

Is The "Energy Star" Worthless ?

For the last 18 years, the government has had a program to designate energy saving appliances and products with a star -- called the "energy star". When a consumer sees this "energy star" on a product, they can be sure that the product will conserve energy and save them money. The program was supposed to save consumers money and help the nation in energy conservation. But does it really work that way?

Many of the products with the "energy star" cost the consumer a little more money (supposedly to pay for the energy saving technology), but the customer is supposed to more than make up for this with the energy savings the product will produce. And some of the "energy star" products even qualify for a tax cut when the consumers files their income taxes, thus producing more savings.

But recently it was discovered that two companies, LG and Kenmore, were selling refrigerators with the "energy star" logo but did not meet the energy conservation standards. In other words, the companies had jacked up the price of their regular old refrigerators and justified it by slapping on an "energy star" logo. The companies had to reimburse consumers and send them kits to make the refrigerators more energy-efficient.

But that incident got the General Accounting Office (GAO) to thinking. How many other products were being sold with the logo, but didn't meet the necessary specifications? Just how well did the program investigate products before authorizing the use of the "energy star" logo? The GAO decided to test the program.

The GAO went "underground" and created four ficticious companies (complete with web sites). They then asked for authorization to put the "energy star" logo on some of their make-believe products. Products like an air purifier (which was just a space heater with a feather duster glued to the top of it) and a four-and-a half foot tall gasoline-powered alarm clock. Fifteen of their products were awarded the "energy star" logo.

There may be some products who actually deserve the logo, but it is likely there are many instances where a company has received an undeserved authorization to use the logo as an excuse to jack up the price of their product. There is really no way for the consumer to know whether they're getting a product that conserves energy, or they're just being scammed out of their hard-earned money.

This is inexcusable. The government must do one of two things -- either test every product submitted to make sure it meets rigid specifications, or discontinue the program (and its tax advantages). Doing neither is not an option, because that just sets up the American consumer to get ripped-off and does little or nothing to conserve our nation's energy resources.

I am not usually a tax complainer. I don't mind paying my share for programs that are needed and work the way they're supposed to. But it makes me really angry to know that tax dollars are being spent on a worthless program like this. Fix it, or get rid of it.