The Architecture 2030 Challenge and US EIA Projections
Buildings use a lot of energy. We spend the majority of our time inside them, controlling the temperature, using computers, charging cell phones, keeping our food cold, getting our food hot, taking hot showers…all those things we do in our daily lives that we rarely give a second thought to. Most of what we do in buildings uses energy. Lots of energy.
Buildings use a lot of energy. We spend the majority of our time inside them, controlling the temperature, using computers, charging cell phones, keeping our food cold, getting our food hot, taking hot showers…all those things we do in our daily lives that we rarely give a second thought to. Most of what we do in buildings uses energy. Lots of energy.
Ed Mazria is a long-time architect with a deep interest in energy. He wrote a book on passive solar design and has been a leading voice for saving energy in the way we design and construct buildings. A few years ago, he founded Architecture 2030 to help solve some of the environmental problems associated with energy use by making buildings more energy efficient. One of their main goals is to have all new buildings and major retrofits of existing buildings be carbon neutral by 2030, hence the name.
I don’t write much about climate change or green house gases or anthropogenic carbon, not because I don’t believe that climate change isn’t real or that global warming isn’t happening. No, I think it’s pretty obvious that the planet is changing. I also believe that humans are a significant contributor to that change.
It doesn’t matter, though, what you think about climate change because there are plenty of good reasons to reduce our energy use.
- The peaking of global oil production
- Pollution from burning fossil fuels
- Habitat destruction
- Mountaintop removal for coal
- Fracking for natural gas
- Oil spills
- National security
- Economic security
This week, Architecture 2030 published an article showing energy consumption projections from the US Energy Information Administration and how those projections have gone down significantly over the past six years. They show the reduction in building energy use that are part of those projections and compare to the Architecture 2030 target, which is still significantly lower than the projections.
The EIA projections, which come from their Annual Energy Outlook papers, are interesting, but it’s good to keep in mind that these are just projections. Also, a lot of the people I talk to don’t put much stock in EIA projections becasue they’ve seemed wildly inflated and based on an assumption that the future’s going to be an extension of the past. The folks who put those projections out seem to be cornucopians in their energy ideology.
Anyway, Architecture 2030 is a great group working towards a saner energy future. You should check them out.
Related Articles
This Post Has 6 Comments
Comments are closed.
Hi Allison,
Hi Allison,
An interester factor in all of this that we pay heed to (and you were kind enough to tweet about). Is that the energy buildings use, is primarily to isolate us from the weather. This means that as climates gradually change, the job of mainatining comfort, changes. An emphasis on heating and insulation, will adjust gradually to an emphasis on free cooling, and ventilation optimization. All of this requires that to study building performance we have an independent reliable weather data. This is why we recently announced a free degree- day weather service at kWIQly.
kWIQly:
kWIQly: Good weather data are important in the design and operation of buildings. Your site and degreedays.net are great resources for that. Thanks!
Possibly tangential story
Possibly tangential story from a home I worked on a couple of years ago:
In Colorado, we typically don’t worry about termite protection. I mentioned to the client that termites are steadily expanding their rang northward as the climate changes. I said that we’ll very likely have a termite problem in Colorado just as they do in other areas easily within the life of the building.
Commence looking at Steve like he is crazy…
Steve, the termite issue is a
Steve, the termite issue is a great example.
The uncertainty of climate change, unknown scientific and stewardship of resources (energy, etc.)is another reason for designing any building enclosure to fit any climate condition, putting all insulation outside of a vapor barrier and include the potential of natural ventilation.
I note with sadness that the
I note with sadness that the concerns on climate change here are all simply practical issues of adaptation, rather that prevention or moderation of the causes.
I also note with sad amusement that the topic of ventless gas heaters was just closed because too many people stated opinions contrary to those of the site owners and thus must have “ties to the ventless heater or gas industries.”
The higher efficiency of ventless heaters saves some wasteful throwing away of heat and thus energy.
I am NOT a representative of those industries. I am an old hippy and environmentalist with a BS in Math and Physical sciences and a doctorate in Biology.
I find the closing of that topic due to unwanted opinions utterly silly and really telling on the commercial purposes of the site owners. Shame.
Ian: I’ve
Ian: I’ve avoided the issue of climate change for the most part in this blog because there’s so much to talk about that doesn’t alienate our readers who don’t believe it. That will change in 2013.
What I find sadly amusing is people who complain about what I do with my blog when they know nothing about the maintenance, the spam comments that I continually have to delete, and that I do this all by myself. This isn’t a big corporation with lots of staff and money. It’s one person writing about 3 articles a week and trying to respond to as many comments as I can, which is getting to be a smaller and smaller percentage because, with 400+ articles, something’s got to give.
It’s not just the ventless gas fireplace article. I’ve decided to keep comments open on articles for one year, so all articles that I published more than 365 days ago are now closed for comments. If the article’s older than that, I don’t have time to keep deleting spam and responding to people repeating the same thing that’s been said several times before they ever found the article.
Regarding the issue of ventless gas fireplaces, there’s a reason that combustion safety experts don’t recommend them. There’s a reason that green building programs don’t allow them. If you’re willing to take a chance on them in your home, that’s fine. I will stick with the folks who understand the issue and recommend venting exhaust gases to the outside.
“I find the closing of that topic due to unwanted opinions utterly silly and really telling on the commercial purposes of the site owners.”
That’s certainly your prerogative, but what commercial purposes do you see behind my actions? I’m interested to know because I sure don’t see them myself, and I’d like to make more money in 2013.