By Dave Brown

We all worry about global warming. Is it really happening, or are we only hearing the Chicken Little alarms of some overwrought environmentalists?  And what about rising gasoline prices? Are these simply the machinations of greedy oil barons, or are they indicators of true scarcity because of growing competition for oil in emerging economies like India and China?

No matter where the truth lies, these are world-wide problems that should not be ignored. Dealing with them will require focussed coordination among major governments. But sadly, our own government has been distracted by big oil lobbyists. Our president has thumbed his nose at the Kyoto accords, and has been deluded into thinking that a good remedy for dealing with foreign oil imports is to open the ANWR for oil exploration. It is true that oil importation has reached staggering levels. In 2004 the US imported an average of 58% of its oil and during certain months up to 64%. That equates to more than $150 billion in oil imports and more than $170 billion including refined petroleum products. The best way to repair our economy and our environment is not to pump more oil, but rather, it is to reduce our appetite.

It is easy to believe that we are at the mercy of multinational corporations and irresistible market forces – that we have no real opportunity to make a difference by ourselves. That may be true if we try things completely on our own. But if many individual actions have a common theme and are devoted to a specific purpose, they can begin to effect sea changes in the world economy and our own quality of life.

Gasoline consumption is a good example. In the past two decades, our government's unwillingness to toughen CAFÉ standards for automobile mileage, along with a loophole that classifies the popular sport utility vehicle as a "light truck," has led to a honeymoon binge between SUVs and the American driver. It has been a relatively painless relationship up to now because gasoline prices were moderate within the overall consumer economy. The cost of fuel was a minor factor compared to comfort, prestige and the perception of safety in the choices of new vehicles to buy. With a 30% gasoline price increase over the past two years, the cost of fuel has become a bigger aggravation, but it is not enough to change driving habits significantly. Many SUV owners confess that gas would have to cost more than $3.50 per gallon before they would seriously consider switching to a smaller vehicle.

But there is a faint beginning of change in America's appetite for driving. A few environmentally sensitive individuals are buying small gas / electric hybrid vehicles and demonstrating the central point of this essay – environmental improvement can begin in small individual steps by socially responsible citizens. They act because "it's the right thing to do" rather than look for immediate cost/benefit gains.  Present day buyers have to pay a list price of around $20 thousand plus a premium of about $5 thousand because early demand for hybrids has outstripped supply.

The actions of these early hybrid adopters have not reduced overall U.S. gasoline consumption, but they have slowed the rate of increase. They also have made the automobile industry take notice and introduce new E85 SUV models that can run on 85% ethanol.  It's a sea change that will drastically alter personal transportation and reduce our hunger for imported oil.

Home Sweet Power Plant
Forward-looking adopters in California are demonstrating another way to conserve energy – the Near-Zero-Energy house. The houses, developed under the U.S. Department of Energy's Building America research program, act as miniature power plants. As a result, their estimated total annual energy cost is about 60 % less than that of similar houses. Clarum Homes, a small builder in northern California recently opened Vista Montana, California's largest near-ZEH community. Each of the 257 single-family and town houses generates electricity with a 1.2 to 2.4 kilowatt grid-tied power system.

An NZEH is carefully designed with spectrally selective glazed windows, highly efficient wall insulation and sealed ductwork. Solar panels on the roof feed through an inverter – a device that changes direct current to the same type of alternating current that the house also gets from the electric power utility grid. When the sun is shining, electricity from the solar panels can be used by lights and appliances in the house. Excess electricity flows out to the grid through a reversing power meter that runs backward when the house is producing power, and runs forward when the house is absorbing power. Electricity produced in an NZEH community tends to be consumed within the same region. As more of these communities are built, loads on the cross-country power distribution system will lessen.

The NZEH movement is not restricted to the west coast. California just happens to be a state where financial incentives and stronger leadership are available to encourage new development of renewable energy projects. In many other parts of the country, individuals acting on their own or with help from nonprofit renewable energy associations are building near-zero-energy homes.

Walking the Walk
My wife and I believe that, if we are going to "talk the talk," we should "walk the walk."  In spring, 2001, we broke ground for our retirement home, OakHill, in Rock County, Wisconsin. It is situated at the back end of a 15-acre parcel on a country road north of Janesville that runs through a glacial terminal moraine.

As retirees, we are on the leading edge of the "baby boom" generation. We believe that boomers are in a special position to begin a new movement toward energy independence by building new homes that follow "green" construction standards, have superb insulation and take advantage of renewable energy sources. These homes cost 20% to 30% more to build than conventional structures. Although they promise lower energy bills, payback periods for some of the technologies are on the order of 15-20 years. In many parts of the country, demonstration grants or other government-sponsored incentives are rare and complicated to get. So why build an NZEH on our own? Mainly, because it is the right thing to do.

Many baby boomers will be retiring in economic times that have supported substantial 401(k) or other good investment accounts. They also may be getting great prices for selling their family homes that now are too large or less accessible for retirement living. If they have been blessed in their own lives, they have a social responsibility to reinvest their money in ways that will benefit not only their own children, but also new generations of children who deserve to live in a world that is less polluted. In short, we should build NZEH retirement homes to help ourselves and save the planet.

My wife and I were in a fortunate situation that allowed us to design OakHill with low energy use features and full disability access. We planned for the immediate needs of our fathers, who would live with us and receive home based health and hospice care, and also for ourselves to build a place where we would be able to stay until the ends of our lives.

While building OakHill, we invested about 10% more for insulated concrete forms instead of a poured concrete basement, and 15% more for high-insulating-value polyurethane foam instead of conventional wall insulation. We spent about twice as much for a buried transfer field and a geothermal heat pump as we would have for a conventional LP gas-fired furnace and air conditioner. And, we installed an outdoor wood-burning furnace for primary heating during five months in the winter.

Our wood burner is economical because we live in the country and have a good supply of "free" wood. The furnace would not be cost effective if we had to buy its fuel. It works well for us because we need to clean up dead trees in our wood lot and fence-rows. But even if we lived in town and had to use natural gas or electricity for heating system backup, we still would have substantial savings in energy costs because of our geothermal heat pump and excellent house insulation. The total energy bill for our 2,000 sq. ft. home during April, 2004 through March, 2005 was $1445. That will go down even more when we install PV panels on OakHill's solar designed south-facing roof.

Dave Brown retired from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1995. Kathie Brown hopes to retire from the same university in 2006. Send questions or comments to Dave@dbec.com

An excellent starting point for more information is the Midwest Renewable Energy Association, www.the-mrea.org