According to some estimates, buildings use almost as much energy as industry and transportation combined, the New York Times reported. Yet they receive little attention — at least in the United States.
The average U.S. building uses about a third more than its German counterpart. Why? In Germany and the rest of the European Union, basic energy consumption requirements have been regulated since the mid-1990s. As a result, European architects made sustainability a theme in their work.
A new Kansas law should help. It requires new commercial and industrial buildings to meet an international energy-efficiency code of standards.
Posted by Andie Clum
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Heckler on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
9 Comments
As the family size is shrinking, appetite for bigger homes are increasing. Have fun paying the utilities for lighting and heating/cooling those empty spaces, folks!
Too true, Ru-Ra.
And what is the lesson of Germany?
That gov’t regulations can GASP! actually DO SOME GOOD!
Nah . . . can’t be true.
Ignore! Ignore!
We pray to you and you alone, oh god of the unfettered free market.
Smite the heavy hand of government interference and let the rich have dominion over the earth, yea verily, as thou hast commanded it . . .
Actually, as building material prices rise – square footage in a home is shrinking. There are always going to be those who want big homes no matter the cost, but the old fixer-upper farmhouses, Victorians, and those with dated wiring and utilities, are going to suck the energy lots more than a new home with efficient appliances and technology.
The lesson of Germany?
That over-regulation brings all manner of evil.
A Kansas law? Can’t work, don’t do it! It will only put Kansas at a disadvantage when competing with other states for industry/jobs/tax base. All states have to be on an equal playing field in order to preserve fairness.
The concept is great, but it will hurt Kansas. Let’s push for federal laws! What, a freedom freak who is against government regulation pushing for more red tape? Well, I’m begenning to see the results of colusion in Corporate America, and how it rapes everyone else. Sometimes regulations are necessary.
We shouldn’t build the arena until the county can assure the public it will be a zero user of energy balanced by its ability to produce energy.
Perhaps they can start by burning all those consultant papers in enclosed carbon capture furnace.
I think if we took all the hot air from the radical-right spin machine, we could use it to power a mid-size city somewhere in the country.
You can buy your way to green conscious without being green yourself. Albert God Gore showed us that can be done. Just need to be from the inherited class and spend money on your own investment group saying it’s trying to buy carbon credits.
The new Kansas law is a good idea. It’s not a new, California has been doing it for years. Energy-efficient construction costs more up front than cheap-energy-based conventional construction. But after five-ten years, the upfront costs have been zeroed out by lower utility bills, and from there on out, the investment returns a positive net savings.
MPS,
I agree with you re lower utility bills = positive net savings later.
But there are also upfront savings, during construction.
For example, the higher costs of more insulation, better windows, etc is offset by the lower cost of a smaller A/C and heat system.
And designing “smart”, with passive solar, better insulation techniques, etc, is basically free.
Then add ‘feebates’, to reward the builders who save the most energy, and encourage those who waste energy to improve.