To start off this post, it would be best to familiarize your self with this article a little, and then read my rebuttal, something that I wrote a little while ago.

Lets talk a little about the accuracy of this article, as a valid criticism.

Toyota never claimed that the Prius gets 60 mpg. Their PR people claim that it CAN get 60 miles per gallon, but they also list its average at 45 mpg city and 53 mpg highway according to the test drive that my mom and I took. I don't think that should make the Prius open to criticism either way, because that is still one of the best on the road. The Hummer DOES NOT EVEN LIST its MPG. Go ahead. Look it up. General Motors does not provide official H2 fuel economy ratings, most reviews have observed high single to low double-digit mileage. So, head to head in terms of fuel efficiency, i think that makes a little difference.

Also, the estimate of 300,000 lifetime miles on the hummer is inaccurate, and potentially absurdly so. While the author doesn't cite all of his sources, that seems optimistic even for GM to be putting out. Every single thing Ive read about the hummer suggests the thing falls apart after 75,000 cause its made of cheap plastic.

But that's not the real point of the article. The real point is that Toyota is a socially irresponsible company because they use nickel from a shitty plant and they ship the batteries around the world, thus the Prius is a lie. Well, besides the fact that GM led the charge to kill the electric car a few years ago, they also got caught with their pants around their ankles when they realized they couldn't keep jobs in Michigan and other traditional American manufacturing plants. Instead, what did they do? they outsourced their jobs to other countries! where its cheaper. So, First Point: GM and other American auto manufacturers are unwilling to invest in the infrastructure to keep new techniques and new cars here. They didn't fight this battle, so I don't think its a fair critique of Toyota to blame them for shipping things when that's the only option.

Next Point: Why is this the only option? Toyota ships it parts all around the world because the places they ship them to are cheapest ways to get the things done the technology needs. If the U.S. car manufacturers would wake up and start creating these parts themselves, there would be no need to ship to china to create nickle foam. They could do it hear cheaper, and much much much more efficiently. If this author questioned why a company would want to spend a lot of money on moving parts around the world so that the batteries could be made correctly... They could also do it with better economic standards. The real problem is that people continue to fight hybrid cars and everything else tooth and nail, point to the INTERMEDIATE points along the way to a greater goal as reasons to halt the progress entirely. The reality is, with the info structure that the US could build in a few years, we could have better plants (and not need to outsource these jobs, because we would be the only ones with the technology)

GM is not the only problem, and I don't want to get into the same one on one dichotomy of Prius v. Hummer, because either way its completely not fair. But GM is a comparison that gets my dander up, because they are a company that has had the opportunity to create the very infrastructure that they would need to create smart energy efficient cars like the Prius HERE with American parts and American labor, cheaply and effectively. And they haven't, and worse, they have fought other companies who have tried. The comparison between the actual Hummer and the actual Prius, on the road and under the same conditions, is absurdly lopsided. The comparison between the infrastructure available to manufacture those two things is misleading, because one is in compete infancy, and one is the end of a long line of General Moters Crap.

In the end, a lot of the energy cost to to build the thing are due new high tech manufacturing processes for which environmentally sound and efficient supply does not exist. They are not, like GM, working with Eisenhower-era engines, parts, and plants. Bottom line is, the energy cost to build a Prius will go down when the manufacturing is further refined. Toyota will need sufficient incentive to invest in refining the supply lines, but I think the reception of the Prius has provided as much. After all, they end up footing the bill for their part's world travel.

The major point glossed over in the article seems to be that buying a Prius means investing in green cars. You are not only contributing to Toyota's ability to produce similar vehicles, but you force other companies to compete for that part of the market. Companies competing to be green would be great (companies competing to market their products as green is not). I believe that the Prius is a genuine step in the right direction, even if its not the final solution in terms of a perfect vehicle. Ever Prius that comes off the rack puts a little more pressure on people to buy the big, bad where as the hummer is obviously a big step backwards.

Now, with all that said, the example of buying something because it A) is a good product, but also because B) it forces the market to move toward making more good products available, shall now be known as the Prius consideration. Just so that my spell check can calm down and relax, I will be abbreviating that as PC to avoid writing the word Prius.

On to "Living the American Green"! I just spoke with a professor from my Alma matta who
thinks that the PC corollary can be used for the project. Basically, he says that we shouldn't even bother focusing on something as useless as home, or personal, energy gathering methods. Instead, if you want to invest in green energy, invest in real wind power. Buy the creds for a giant turbine on the top of a mountain, where its actually maxing out its potential, and by doing so force up the demand for your energy provider to invest in more larger wind turbines. Dabbling with the massively inefficient home stuff isn't the best way to spend the cash.

I think this is exactly the reason that LtAG can be great. The PC corollary is the kind of thing that, given a few episodes of production, we can make much much more real then writing about it on a sheet of paper. We can show, without a shadow of a doubt, that its true: investing in a wind Turbine and putting it in your back yard can barely power a microwave oven. We can also break down the Dollar amounts that you re-coup off your energy bill from having a Wind Turbine yourself, versus what the same amount of money would do to force the hand of your local energy Industry Giant.

What is, and continues to be, very important about this project is LtAG's "come learn with us" mentality. It might well be true that Solar is the only viable project for a suburban home owner looking to add on to their house, but knowing that it is true and demonstrating that it is true are two completely different things. This true/not true dichotomy seems obvious to some, (especially people well versed in the field) but less obvious and more exciting to a large portion of the population. We live in an age where people spend mind numbing amounts of time, energy and money to obfuscate exactly what is going on in all levels of our lives, and exactly what each option does or does not do is a valuable, even crucial part of the experiment. One of the amazing doors that a show like MythBusters opened for us is that failure, as long as its amusing and well written, is a perfectly acceptable reality. And if someone like me, who is relatively knowledgeable, and vaguely well read, still has doubt about each technology's effectiveness: well, it seems like our audience might not be so sure themselves. And the example of PC is exactly the sort of discussion we can have once the wind turbine fails to show any appreciable change.

Living the American Green

The beginnings of a Business Plan. What else do we need in our opening statement?

Our project, called "Living the American Green" (LtAG), will critically evaluate the green movement in the united states with the goal of shifting people's perceptions about "living green." Americans still view Green energy as a fringe part of everyday life, as something that does not apply to the suburban commuter or the small town Mom and Pop store. While they may be wrong about this, the proponents of green energy also overstate their claims of energy savings and environmental goodwill. We will create an internet media channel dedicated to unpacking these issues by documenting our own attempts to "Green" an energy inefficient average American suburban home. We hope to convey our successes, our failures, and our thoughts throughout the project, while creating a human example of the amounts of effort and money that would go into installing alternative energy sources in your home.

Regardless of the personal sentiments of the participants, it is our stated goal to approach the project with skepticism. This, combined with a sense of humor and a general spirit of exploration, will make the show palatable to an audience who are not currently convinced that Alternative Energy applies to them.

Central to our efforts of reaching a large audience will be creating fun, entertaining, and humorous documentation of our efforts for distribution through our website. "Living the American Green" will not be shrill or lecture at the audience. While straight forward lecturing might be effective for some, we believe that it misses a very large and very important part of the American population. In lieu of lecturing to our audience from a conclusive standpoint, we invite viewers to learn and laugh with us as we apply various "green" living solutions to our own living situation. Part product review, part myth-busting, part reality TV, we plan to expose, confirm, and appreciate the green movement as it applies to American suburbia.

The Project Plan: LtAG will begin when we move into an unmodified suburban house picked out for its size and general energy inefficiency. We will try and find a house that fits the classic definition of a “McMansion.” We will first live in the house for a month or two to get a basic control reading of the amount of energy the house uses.

We will then begin modifying the house along two basic green lines:

A) Energy Types: Wind, Solar, Hydro (if at all possible) and Biomass power in a series of head to head comparisons. In this branch of the project, we will try and isolate exactly how much energy production each of these energy types is capable of producing in an environment not specifically cultured for their success. We will also try and experiment with different models and options commercially available within each energy source.

B) Energy Efficiency: Insulation, moderation, more efficient devices, etc. In the second Branch of LtAG, we will try and come to grips with the different ways you can improve on the energy you are already using, as well as get a hands on idea of what it means to use a little more or a little less Wattage per Hour. After we have been in the house for a few months, we will be completely removing ourselves from the grid to dramatize the situation a little and raise the hypothetical stakes of the project.

These hands on demonstrations both make our project something that many home owners will easily identify with, as well as help them parse through some of the different options available by seeing how much work they are and what they actually realize.

For the Project, we will have 6 people living full time in the house: 3 as permanent staff and 3 as live in commuters and support staff. The Three permanent members will be: a researcher/writer, A technology/engineer (for the installation and maintenance of the different energy sources) and a web support/video editing person. The three support staff will all keep personal track of their energy use, as well as write down thoughts and tribulations around living a green life. Potentially on of the three commuters could also be a live in person in charge of publicity/community/financial issues. All of these rolls are subject to crossover as needed, and all 6 of our staff will also be doubling as the subjects for our documentary work.

Real Green, Real World

I still think that the commune is viable, but after some lengthy conversations with my Father and the honorable Anthony Gonzales, (potentially not his real name) the realization might have to change somewhat.

As everyone has been pointing out, the concept thus far will cost a lot of money. Not even counting the operating costs, you’re looking at a whole bunch of money to build 5 free standing buildings. Plus, the real world applicability of a stand along cabin leaves something to be desired. Turns out, most of us don’t actually live in tiny little cabins off in the middle of nowhere.

While I accept this point, I have been loath to give up my commune in the woods type theory. But then, AG raised a very valid alternative: Wouldn’t it be better, anyway, to see if we can convert a McMansion? Quite a few people live in these large, horribly energy inefficient monstrosities, and you can find one much easier then you can find the perfect piece of land to put up the compound I was envisioning before. Plus, the suburban reality seems more applicable to many then the start from scratch builder commune. And the real kicker: at the end of the day, the house is an asset that other people might actually want. We could even sell the thing!

It’s even more like a greenhouse Real World. We have 5 or 6 people living in this house: A writer, a video man, an internet man, and a techie/builder are our crew of four, plus a few others for the sake of more help. The “others” in this category we imagine would have outside jobs, or be in school or some such, and would be living there and using energy more along the lines of an average person. They wouldn’t be in the house 24/7, and would provide a different level of context for us in comparing to your average consumer.

So, now the plan looks like this: Purchase a house, and live in it for a month or two (or three?) to get an idea of how it was operating. How much power the house used, with what results, etc. After we had a basic control point, we would start installing different energy systems. Say, Solar for a month stretch, then Wind for a month stretch, then Bio-Fuel for a month. We would set up the systems so that they could be the only things powering the house during given periods, so that for a month, we would operate with as much power as each source would provide.

After taking it through the monthly cycle a few times, we could start with the overhauling of the house in different ways, and see how much of a difference things like good insulation, smart windows and intelligent energy use made. Side projects would also be encouraged, so that by year two, one of our commuters might be driving a bio-fueled car, and we might have a greenhouse with some home-grown out back (that’s Tomatoes, for those wondering). However, these side projects should not detract from the overall message of what I hypothesize we will find: that it really doesn’t take that much effort to make your house from a drafty wreck into an energy efficient juggernaut.

The entire project would be recorded on a website, which is sort of the centerpiece of what the public sees. Daily thoughts, information on each product, results and suggestions on how to do it yourself, with many different levels of complexity (E.G: the main page is simple, but the rabbit hole goes as deep as you want to follow it). Utilization of web Video is a must.

The eventual goal is to become the single widest ranging website for everything green energy, while simultaneously making it fun, accessible, and manageable in its scope. The new and improved commune plan actually gets to the goals of the old commune even more directly, because it makes it something that a larger range of people can relate to. Plus, there are more finite goals, because it will be interesting to see if any combo of energy sources plus general work on a house can change it from the poorly constructed and energy inefficient behemoth into something completely self sufficient and possibly even capable of producing net energy gain.

One Million little questions

The real question behind the entire commune concept rests with money. Where do you get it? Who gives it to you? How do you guarantee these mysterious backers some sort of product when its all said and done? And, most importantly, how much does it all cost?

Now, I don’t know who reads this. I used to think no one did, but then there was that incident with the ol’ job that convinced me that many people might well be stumbling their way here, so im putting it out there in two parts:

How much does it cost to put up a building? Does anyone have any actual numbers here? (Dad, I’m looking at you. Is there some magical number that a standard contractor asks for a standard square footage on a house? Can you even ballpark it without a floor plan of the different houses? What part of the cost of building is materials, and how much is design and labor?) I don’t even know what sort of assumptions I allowed to make!

Second question, once I have my imaginary number, is: from whom? How does one start going about funding a project like this? Who does one ask? Is it magazines? Government grants? If anyone out there has a clue where THEY would start looking, let me know. I’m looking, but not in the right places yet.

As I think about it now, I keep coming up with huge huge numbers for my operating budget for a few year long process. So, should I A)break it down into segments and try and get people/companies to sign on as they go? Or, B) come out with a large number and keep it in peoples heads the entire time? Crazy amount of hypothetical, really, but I’m open for suggestions on how I should proceed. Adam, want to help me mock up what buildings we would need?

Some thoughts on a commune, specific and global:

Will the idea of the commune experiment actually be applicable to others as a model? A few people have suggested that the whole difficulty of the Green-izing of America is that the differences in situations make any one example moot. Here is why I don’t think this will be true:

At any given point, I (a relatively motivated, yet occasionally overwhelmed individual with something of an eco-conscience) feel completely lost about what alternative energy sources are useful, how much each one provides under what conditions, etc. I think that a study in one environmental condition can really put all the claims that green energy make into the light of personal experience. This doesn’t mean that anything can be said for sure about other situations and conditions, but it does mean that a final study or book we create can be used as an anchor in an otherwise complicated and unknown world. The claims of people selling solar power or wind power vary dramatically depending on who is doing the talking. What I don’t know, and want to know, is a range: How much work, how much energy results, how does it actually change over the course of the year, etc. Sure, our experiment is not going to answer all these questions, but it can act as a blue print for other people, and give them a range with which to experiment themselves, as well as some troubleshooting help to figure things out along the way.

Its easy to say, but I think any data we can create would be possible to extrapolate to other situations. We should hash out as much as possible the specific conditions that we are dealing with where ever our commune ends up, and you can use that to make a guess for yourself down the road. Our wind chart says X, yours says Y, but they are close together on the overall range. Our solar house was dealing with an average temperature of 42 degrees over the course of the spring, your house deals with 35 degrees, but you know how much energy we used for heat so you can factor in a larger number. There would be a Margin of Error, but not a large enough one to make the whole process not useful.

Now, some links and thinks:

The Supreme Court finally ruled on the EPA, essentially forcing them to do their job. I confess to being a little confused as to how this argument was still going on. I don’t even think the republican party or the oil companies are as far behind the times as the Bush administration. The EPA made the argument that they couldn’t Protect the Environment… because it would interfere with the jurisdiction of the transportation department? Really? What ARE they allowed to do then?

Anyway, this seems like one of those things that needs to happen, if only to remind us how far away we really are from getting to where need to be in terms of government support of alternative energy.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Scotus-Greenhouse-Gase.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

And here is some quality pie in the sky type stuff. This is the logical extreme of green energy in the city:
http://nymag.com/news/features/30020/
How sweet is that? Its like a SimCity 2000 building. And its only 2007!

Plan B

We live in an age where everyone has things done for them with remarkable speed. Want to find a hotel? There are three million websites that will compare everything for you from the bounce of a bed to the attractiveness of the room service crew (those things are not connected. Jeeze. This is a rigorous scientific document). Want to buy a car? There are fifteen million ways to search for all the gizmos and gadgets that will work for you. And don’t even get me started on the wide world of resources available to you if you want to start gardening, modeling, or (as I’ve recently learned) collecting tropical Fi…. Sharks.

But for some reason, the wide world of Green energy remains mostly untapped. There are just beginning to be a large number of products out there that might be available for household use. Might be able to save you energy, might be able to lower that bill, and, who knows, might reduce your personal Carbon Emission to something a little closer to what god and nature intended. But, and lets be honest here, the process of greening up your home is a lot of work. It's an incredibly daunting project to just know where to start and how to go about installing everything and keeping it running, let alone optimizing things to your particular condition/situation. I myself often forget to turn out lights, and have been known to leave my computer running for weeks! And I know that just keeping the place from falling apart is more then enough for anyone. That’s why I am going to start a project that will, scientifically, OBJECTIVELY decipher how hard it is to add a lil bit of Green to your life. And you don't have to give up the Big screen TV. (OK, the big screen might have to go, but I promise that the general way of life shall remain unchanged. mmmm, except those pants. those need to go too.)

I will catalogue and control how much energy is gained from different easy to use alternative energy sources. I will figure out what works, what is difficult to install, what takes maintenance, and what runs like a dream as soon as its in. Ill record watts per day, break downs per month, and repair costs per year. Ill know what generates more in different temperatures, and which systems take an Engineering degree to install. The whole time, I (and by this point, its really clear that I mean WE, because this will be a lot of work, and I’m Lazy) will stay on top of the costs of each, while also tracking and researching the newest and greenest of energy resources, so that by the end of the project I can say objectively what works the best and what combination of green energy you can use to make you feel like a better person. (I actually know the answer already. Eat Right and exercise more. But we’ve been ignoring that for generations, why stop now??)

I will also have a Video Camera, so that I can sell out to MTV and spend the rest of my life relaxing in the comfort of my horribly energy inefficient McMansion while I feed Empire Penguin meat to my Pit-bull named “Nuge”. Ahh, to dream the impossible dream.

Read on to discover the basic outline of what the project will look like.

1.) Step one: Start a Commune

2.) Step two: ???

3.) Step three: PROFIT!

The concept looks like this: A main house (built like a regular commune type structure), with four cabin satellites around the outside. Each Cabin runs on a different type Alternative Energy source, and supports a like number of people for a set amount of time. We find out what its like to live under these conditions, when we "stop having fun, and start to get REAL". No, sorry, I got carried away there for a moment.

A definition of Green Energy, as described by the all-seeing-all-knowing Wikipedia is as follows:

“Green energy includes natural energetic processes which can be harnessed with little pollution. Anaerobic digestion, geothermal power, wind power, small-scale hydropower, solar power, biomass power, tidal power and wave power fall under such a category. Some versions may also include power derived from the incineration of waste.”

For the sake of an easily linked article, we can assume that the definitions of these things, as broad as they are, are the categories that I am going to use as demarcations.

We can also eliminate a few of the runners in this discussion: We won’t have access to the scale technology to successfully run Anaerobic Digestion, and neither will we have the infrastructure for incineration as an energy source. These two are out. We are also probably not going to be able to locate near enough to an ocean to have a legitimate shot at Tidal Power, and Wave Power is pretty much on boats only, as I understand it. These two, for the sake of this discussion, are also out. Geothermal Power, also dependant on massive amounts of heat generated in a single place, is also not practical for this discussion.

This leaves, as basic building blocks for my experiment, the following: Wind Power., Solar Power, Bio-Mass Energy and Small Scale Hydro-Electric Power. Wind, water, sun and… stuff. For the sake of this project, that leaves us with 4 Cabins, each trying to get to the point of supporting 2 people full time for 1 year. Thus, we are looking at 8 people, with a potential support/research staff of up to 2 more: living in the main house, and working on different forms of insulation etc. Variable cast: 8-10.

Each house has the express goal of creating enough energy to allow two people to live in relative comfort. The goal is not minimalist living, but rather luxurious living with minimalist tactics. Thus, we would make each cabin into a one bedroom apartment, with a larger common room/kitchen and a smaller sleeping area. We would attempt to equip each with running water, a fully equipped kitchen and bathroom, a television and a P.C. We would build each house within a budget, and hopefully insulate in such a way as be both the energy efficient and most cost effective. (if it were a really good experiment, we would run three cabins with each type of energy source, and record different levels of insulation as well. We are almost certainly not able to perform to that level of scientific rigidity.)

We will do our best, over the course of this experiment, to share equal time spent in each cabin. (E.G. people living there, cooking there, watching TV there, throwing parties there, etc.) And we will try to remove as many of the nearly limitless other variables that will be thrust onto the scene as we possibly can.

More (hopefully much) to come.