This is a very important article excerpted from the Rocky Mountain Institute's (RMI)website. See more about the RMI below.
Accelerating Solar Power Adoption: Compounding Cost Savings Across the Value Chain
AUTHOR: Newman, Sam;Doig, Stephen;Hansen, Lena;Lacy, Virginia
DOCUMENT ID: 2009-03
YEAR: 2009
DOCUMENT TYPE: Journal or Magazine Article
PUBLISHER: American Solar Energy Society
http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Library/2009-03_AcceleratingSolarPowerAdoption
This paper discusses common barriers to solar power adoption and techniques for getting around those barriers. The authors argue that for solar power to become a significant contributor to energy supply, and hence greenhouse gas emissions reductions, the industry has to achieve high annual growth rates for decades. The challenge cannot be overstated, especially once subsidies can no longer be relied upon to drive industry growth. Several barriers, including high costs, lack of reliable demand, supply chain dynamics, and utility integration issues, threaten to prevent adoption rates from rising as fast as is required. In particular, high costs are a major barrier, since solar power must soon be cost competitive unsubsidized.
Fortunately, large cost reduction potential is available, which has not been captured during the hectic expansion of the industry. Based on experience in other industries, the basic tools of end use efficiency, whole systems design, lean manufacturing, and economies of scale will let technology manufacturers and PV installers drive down costs by a factor of two or more. These savings, enabled with support from government policies, industrial collaboration, and process efficiency gains, can bring today’s PV technologies to grid parity in many markets, allowing the exponential growth curve to continue.
http://www.rmi.org/rmi/Library/2009-03_AcceleratingSolarPowerAdoption
Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI)
Vision and Mission
Vision
RMI’s vision is a world thriving, verdant, and secure, for all, for ever.
Mission
Our mission is to drive the efficient and restorative use of resources.
RMI's style is non-adversarial and trans-ideological, emphasizing integrative design, advanced technologies, and mindful markets. Our strategic focus, executed through specific initiatives designed to take our work rapidly to scale, is to map and drive the transition from coal and oil to efficiency and renewables.
We work extensively with the private sector, as well as with civil society and government, to create abundance by design and to apply the framework of natural capitalism.
Showing posts with label RMI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RMI. Show all posts
Monday, February 8, 2010
Friday, May 22, 2009
Greening This Old House
Greening This Old House
By Bryan Walsh
Thursday, Apr. 23, 2009
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1893514,00.html
Would Abraham Lincoln have gone green? Frank Milligan thinks so. Milligan is the director of President Lincoln's Cottage, a Gothic Revival mansion on a breezy hill a few miles from the White House, where Lincoln and his family sought relief from the summer heat during the Civil War. The cottage and its surrounding buildings were made a national monument in 2000, and in preparation for its opening last year, the National Trust for Historic Preservation carried out a multimillion-dollar renovation. But preservationists didn't just restore the buildings. They greened them, beginning with the Beaux Arts house next door that now serves as a visitors' center. Renovators kept 98% of the house's existing walls, roofs and floors and used recyclable material for the rest. Large windows were put in to reduce the need for artificial lighting, and low-flow plumbing was installed to cut water waste. The renovations earned the visitors' center a gold rating from the U.S. Green Building Council--and made the site a model for historic buildings in need of a face-lift. "Lincoln was always ahead of his time," says Milligan. "And going green is the future."
When we think of green buildings, we tend to think of new ones--the kind of high-tech, solar-paneled masterpieces that make the covers of architecture magazines. But the U.S. has more than 100 million existing homes, and it would be incredibly wasteful (not to mention totally unrealistic) to tear them all down and replace them with greener versions. An enormous amount of energy and resources went into the construction of those dwellings. And it would take an average of 65 years for the reduced carbon emissions from a new energy-efficient home to make up for the resources lost by demolishing an old one. So in the broadest sense, the greenest home is the one that has already been built. But at the same time, nearly half of U.S. carbon emissions come from heating, cooling and powering our homes, offices and other buildings. "You can't deal with climate change without dealing with existing buildings," says Richard Moe, the president of the National Trust.
With some exceptions, the oldest homes tend to be the least energy-efficient. Houses built before 1939 use about 50% more energy per square foot than those built after 2000. The main culprit? Tiny cracks and gaps that expand over time and let in more outside air.
Fortunately, there are a tremendous number of relatively simple changes that can green older homes, from historic ones like Lincoln's Cottage to your own postwar abode. And efficiency upgrades can save more than just the earth; they can help shield property owners from rising power costs. Moreover, a nationwide effort to improve existing buildings could create hundreds of thousands of green jobs. (In addition to using less raw materials, renovations are often more labor-intensive per dollar spent than new construction is.) "There's an enormous opportunity here," says Lane Burt, an energy-policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Energy efficiency is a way to spend now to create jobs, while still saving down the line."
The stimulus package includes some $8 billion for weatherization programs for low-income households, but that will cover only a small slice of the country's housing stock. To promote the greening of existing buildings, the National Trust last month launched the Preservation Green Lab, a think tank based in Seattle, and is working with members of Congress to pass energy-efficiency legislation that would increase rebates and subsidies to cover as much as half the cost of a green retrofit. Such incentives are vital. Although lower utility costs mean upgrades will pay for themselves over time, the up-front cost of better insulation or double-pane windows can be prohibitive, especially during a recession.
In the meantime, you can make small changes to begin greening your home. You don't need solar panels or rooftop wind turbines. You just need a good caulking gun. Start by thinking of your house as a submarine, and plug the leaks in your walls, doors and windows. Be sure to insulate the attic and the basement, since up to 20% of energy costs can come from heat loss in those spaces. A home energy audit is also a good idea; energysavers.gov details how to do one yourself as well as how to go about hiring a professional. So be like Lincoln and savor the summer breezes, but avoid winter drafts.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1893514,00.html
By Bryan Walsh
Thursday, Apr. 23, 2009
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1893514,00.html
Would Abraham Lincoln have gone green? Frank Milligan thinks so. Milligan is the director of President Lincoln's Cottage, a Gothic Revival mansion on a breezy hill a few miles from the White House, where Lincoln and his family sought relief from the summer heat during the Civil War. The cottage and its surrounding buildings were made a national monument in 2000, and in preparation for its opening last year, the National Trust for Historic Preservation carried out a multimillion-dollar renovation. But preservationists didn't just restore the buildings. They greened them, beginning with the Beaux Arts house next door that now serves as a visitors' center. Renovators kept 98% of the house's existing walls, roofs and floors and used recyclable material for the rest. Large windows were put in to reduce the need for artificial lighting, and low-flow plumbing was installed to cut water waste. The renovations earned the visitors' center a gold rating from the U.S. Green Building Council--and made the site a model for historic buildings in need of a face-lift. "Lincoln was always ahead of his time," says Milligan. "And going green is the future."
When we think of green buildings, we tend to think of new ones--the kind of high-tech, solar-paneled masterpieces that make the covers of architecture magazines. But the U.S. has more than 100 million existing homes, and it would be incredibly wasteful (not to mention totally unrealistic) to tear them all down and replace them with greener versions. An enormous amount of energy and resources went into the construction of those dwellings. And it would take an average of 65 years for the reduced carbon emissions from a new energy-efficient home to make up for the resources lost by demolishing an old one. So in the broadest sense, the greenest home is the one that has already been built. But at the same time, nearly half of U.S. carbon emissions come from heating, cooling and powering our homes, offices and other buildings. "You can't deal with climate change without dealing with existing buildings," says Richard Moe, the president of the National Trust.
With some exceptions, the oldest homes tend to be the least energy-efficient. Houses built before 1939 use about 50% more energy per square foot than those built after 2000. The main culprit? Tiny cracks and gaps that expand over time and let in more outside air.
Fortunately, there are a tremendous number of relatively simple changes that can green older homes, from historic ones like Lincoln's Cottage to your own postwar abode. And efficiency upgrades can save more than just the earth; they can help shield property owners from rising power costs. Moreover, a nationwide effort to improve existing buildings could create hundreds of thousands of green jobs. (In addition to using less raw materials, renovations are often more labor-intensive per dollar spent than new construction is.) "There's an enormous opportunity here," says Lane Burt, an energy-policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Energy efficiency is a way to spend now to create jobs, while still saving down the line."
The stimulus package includes some $8 billion for weatherization programs for low-income households, but that will cover only a small slice of the country's housing stock. To promote the greening of existing buildings, the National Trust last month launched the Preservation Green Lab, a think tank based in Seattle, and is working with members of Congress to pass energy-efficiency legislation that would increase rebates and subsidies to cover as much as half the cost of a green retrofit. Such incentives are vital. Although lower utility costs mean upgrades will pay for themselves over time, the up-front cost of better insulation or double-pane windows can be prohibitive, especially during a recession.
In the meantime, you can make small changes to begin greening your home. You don't need solar panels or rooftop wind turbines. You just need a good caulking gun. Start by thinking of your house as a submarine, and plug the leaks in your walls, doors and windows. Be sure to insulate the attic and the basement, since up to 20% of energy costs can come from heat loss in those spaces. A home energy audit is also a good idea; energysavers.gov details how to do one yourself as well as how to go about hiring a professional. So be like Lincoln and savor the summer breezes, but avoid winter drafts.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1893514,00.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
