Winter is coming... Let the thermometer wars begin!

“Hold somebody's hand and feel its warmth. Gram per gram, it converts 10,000 times more energy per second than the sun.  You find this hard to believe?  Here are the numbers: an average human weighs 70 kilograms and consumes about 12,600 kilojoules / day; that makes about 2 millijoules / gram.second, or 2 milliwatts / gram.  For the sun it's a miserable 0.2 microjoules / gram.second.  Some bacteria, such as the soil bacterium ‘Azotobacter’ convert as much as 10 joules / gram.second, outperforming the sun by a factor 50 million.  I am warm because inside each of my body cells there are dozens, hundreds or even thousands of mitochondria that burn the food I eat.”

Gottfried Schatz, in "Jeff's view on science and scientists", 2006

El Niño is in full swing, and most of the country is about to undergo the kinds of temperature extremes (not to mention precipitation events, many of which will be white and fluffy, or clear and slippery) which inevitably lead to discussions of weatherproofing one’s home, and finding ways to save on heating costs.

We at Myrtle’s place, of course, live in the sliver of Texas which is just north of subtropical, so we don’t actually have to deal with the white or slippery stuff very often (snow on average falls in the lower Brazos Valley about every four years, and hardly ever sticks for more than a few hours), but it does get cold enough that many of our neighbors flip their thermostats from “cool” to “heat” – we are not among them, as we throw open the windows and put the heating blankets on our beds.  (Few pleasures match that of sleeping warmly in cold air, but we digress.)

This seems an excellent opportunity to discuss the global effects of exceptionally local actions – most of the time, when winter heating costs are discussed, it is in the context of personal housekeeping, and this is appropriate.  The immediate impact of heating (and cooling, the summer equivalent of this discussion) on household budgets are not only in and of themselves important microeconomic considerations, but they also impact thousands of other decisions made by individual consumers which, in turn, have a great impact on the overall economy and (what we at Myrtle’s place consider more important) on the environment.

The usual suggestions involve things like weather-stripping around doors and windows, making sure attic and wall spaces are properly insulated, etc.  We do not disagree with any of these suggestions.  They are all good and proper (there are some ways to do each of those items which are more environmentally conscious than others, but that is another topic altogether).

What we are concerned with today is more of a theoretical understanding of how weatherizing one’s home works, and how that fits into the broader scheme of maximizing the philosophy of the 3 R’s (reduce, reuse, recycle).

There are two distinct concepts from the world of physics at play in heating or cooling one’s home which have a direct impact on how much energy we expend and how costly it is to do so.

Efficiency and effectiveness are sometimes compatible, and sometimes not.  The best practices in the home or business space involve that happy conjunction between these two ideas.

When discussing power transference for a particular use, efficiency is defined as the useful power output divided by the total power consumed.  Expression of this concept is very common in all branches of engineering; the formula is typically denoted by the Greek letter small Eta (η - ήτα).  Efficiency = Useful power output / Total power input.

Effectiveness, on the other hand, refers to the capacity to produce a desired result.  Since the desired result is a subjective concept, effectiveness may be represented in logical terms, but not mathematical terms.

This, of course, makes it impossible to objectively decide on the best possible system to use in pretty much any household application, whether weatherizing, cooking, cleaning, lighting or entertaining, just to name a few of the activities in which we all engage.

In terms of heating and cooling, this means that one must first decide what temperature range one wishes to maintain in one’s home (or office), and that frequently must be a consensus reached among many people with opposing desires.

Most often, the range in question will vary greatly.  Fortunately, the efficiency involved in strategies to keep within that range involve a large set of common tools (the aforementioned weather-stripping, insulation, etc.)  However, some clear variations exist in terms of personal aesthetic preferences, tastes, and the width of tolerable range. 

For example, one of the most effective strategies in heating and cooling very directly impacts the look of one’s home.  We have written before about the advantages of painting one’s roof white.  It drops the ambient temperature of one’s attic spaces by a huge percentage (in our case, the temperature of our roof dropped from 150° F to 108° F immediately after painting it in a Brazos Valley May several years ago).  Similarly, planting vines along one’s western or southern exposures can vastly reduce the amount of heat in summer reaching one’s home.

However… both of those strategies leave one susceptible to slightly more heat loss in winter.  That could, of course, be mitigated by use of extra insulation in those areas, but the point is that in isolation, one strategy or another might require some tweaking in order to maintain balance between efficiency and effectiveness.  And some home-owners associations might not look kindly on certain strategies, more’s the pity.

For our northern counterparts, winter is an especially good time to consider this balance, as the very choice of heating method involves a wide range of efficiencies, and not all engineers agree on the best choice of formulae to determine that efficiency anyway.  Just to give you an easy to understand anecdotal idea, the single most efficient form of heat transfer is that of simply burning any carbon-based fuel source with minimal water content (fossil fuel, wood, paper, mummies, you name it).  Typically 100% of the convertible material is consumed by flames.  So, theoretically, if you want heat, a fireplace is the best possible option.  Except… while it is extremely efficient, it is usually not very effective, because most of the heat goes straight up the chimney, or into the bricks and mortar right around the fireplace.  That’s usually not the desired outcome.

So, most people go with some kind of HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) system, utilizing either electricity or some kind of fossil fuel (typically gas, heating oil, or coal) for the wintertime heating functionality.

Calculating the efficiency of such a system is a nightmare, given the number of variables involved of which the manufacturers could not possibly be aware, so believe the BTU (or other) calculations at your own risk.  Typically, though, if they are claiming a higher efficiency than others, there’s a fair bet that they are correct.

The effectiveness, on the other hand?  That’s an entirely separate question.  The delivery method can directly affect bothefficiency and effectiveness, but then… the effectiveness being far more dependent on the delivery method, it can impact howefficient a system is required in order to achieve cost-effectiveness, measured only by how much one must spend compared to one’s budget.

To give you some idea, perhaps heat is only required at a certain time of day, in a certain part of the building.  In the frigid north, a lone radiator rattling away in one’s sitting room in relatively inefficient manner (but utilizing only a fraction of the fuel necessary to heat the whole house) would be much less expensive (and much less ecologically damaging) than an extremely efficient system which heats the whole house.

In our cozy home on the Gulf Coast, a small electric space heater might achieve the same result, at much less cost than running a full household heater that only has to be turned on three or four times a year.

The same principles, as we mentioned, may be applied to all other home activities – lights, in particular, have recently become a focal point for such concerns – one of the federal government’s greatest achievements of the 21^st century, actually, has gone relatively unheralded:  light bulb labeling has switched from emphasizing wattage (a measure of the total input) to lumens (a measure of the total output).  We may make a posting about that some time soon, actually, because in addition to the output quantity of light, there are vast differences in the output quality of light, which make the comparison of efficiency and effectiveness particularly interesting.

The bottom line for each activity, though, is to synthesize strategies which fit into the overall theme of reducing the amount of input necessary to meet particular goals (choosing not to heat or cool certain rooms in one’s house, for example), reusing any materials which might assist in meeting those goals (hanging old quilts on walls provides a surprising amount of extra insulation, and that’s just for starters – Google “decorative insulation” and see just how cool modern temperature control can be), and recycling whenever possible (using cellulose pulp insulation, for example, frequently means using recycled materials, though check with the manufacturer to be sure).

The calculations can be complicated to an inconceivable degree if one wants to get picky with absolute goals (zero carbon emissions, most efficient heat distribution, etc.) but if one keeps in mind just the broad concepts (efficient is different from effective; reduce, reuse, recycle when possible), the minefield of consumer angst when it comes to the seasons of extreme discomfort (“The hell with it, just turn on the bleepity-bleep heater!”) can be avoided.

Remember, just being alive is an exercise in temperature conversion and energy expenditure.  Being conscientious does not have to be a chore; it can be a game.

Plus, in winter, there’s hot cocoa.

Happy farming!

Small Counterpuncher Sloop vs. Lumbering Brawler Frigate? Take the Sloop!

Maritime history holds numerous lessons for families navigating the treacherous waters of a modern economy.  The story of warfare at sea is the story of a conflict between those who attempt to package the most power on a single platform and those who take a more precise approach, attempting to deliver a discrete amount of power on a smaller, more maneuverable platform.

Basically, frigates vs. sloops.

There are other examples, of course, besides these storied sailing vessels, but the frigate and the sloop are the best exemplars.  And the story we are slowly plodding towards is the story of the attempted invasion of England by the Spanish Armada.

The Spanish, of course, had the ships-of-the-line, the galleons, huge ships with hundreds of large guns.  The English had a lot of little ships – sloops – with far fewer and far lighter weapons, but with a tremendous advantage in being able to tack into the wind and to change direction far more quickly.

Thanks to tricky weather, the sloops had almost insurmountable advantages in that battle, in spite of the conventional wisdom which held that the Armada was nigh invincible.  Conventional Wisdom, much like Common Sense, is wrong far more often than it is right.  Like Horatio Hornblower, the intrepid fictional adventurer of another age of British sea power, proves time and again, a simple calculation of facts and angles is far more reliable than is the related “wisdom” of what “everyone knows”.

So it is at Myrtle’s place.  We strive to be more of a sloop and less of a frigate.  This will prove more important as time goes by; economic uncertainty coupled with a changing climate mean our family will have to adapt in ways that quite simply cannot be predicted.  So, we need to lighten the gun decks and increase our sail-to-beam cross-functionality.

One of the first ways in which we are attempting to accomplish this goal is to completely re-evaluate how we consume energy.  According to the Energy Star website the average home spends about $2,200 on energy bills every year.  This makes energy consumption a low-hanging fruit in terms of where we can save money and streamline our family operation.  How can we cut this number and make our family more adaptable?

First and foremost, we had to evaluate what, exactly, goes into our consumption habits:

• Air Conditioning and Heating
• Water Heating
• Clothes Washing and Drying
• Food Storage
• Food Preparation
• Dishwashing
• Computer
• Entertainment (television, radio)
• Lighting

Some of these areas are more readily downsized than others, but each provides ample opportunities for sloopification.

Air Conditioning and Heating:  Really, given that this is Texas, heating is not a concern.  We don’t even turn on the central heat each winter; we do sometimes put a space heater on in the chicken coop.  We have not yet thought of a more energy efficient way to heat the birds when temperatures go sub-freezing, but since that only happens a few times each winter, this is not a high priority item.

A/C, on the other hand, is a major concern.  When a “cool” week is one in which we don’t get over 95° more than twice, we obviously need to keep the air conditioner running more often than not.  How to keep it from bankrupting us in less than a month is, therefore, a major concern.

There are several steps we have taken to reduce cooling expenses.  First and foremost, of course, we bought a smaller house (900 square feet) on the theory that the less house there is to cool, the less expensive it will be.  Next, we have a relatively new unit – less than five years old.

Then there are the not-so-easy steps.  We blew insulation into our attic a few weeks ago; for the money, this is one of the easiest investments most people can make.  Very few homes have so much insulation already that they would not benefit from more.  While we went with the blow-in cellulose, there are numerous innovations in the insulation market which it would be well worth your time to investigate.

Our roof, thankfully, is galvanized aluminum, which has reflective properties far superior to those of practically any tile materials available today.  However, as an older roof, it had begun to wear and rust; the solution to extending the lifetime of the aluminum, it turns out, also aids our quest for lower utility bills – there are a variety of products on the market which make claims to “heat reflective” properties, and anecdotally we can confirm that some of these claims actually have merit. 

Perhaps the most important “heat reflective” property, of course, is color.  White paint does not absorb heat, it reflects it.  Once again, consult your elementary school science text book.  Well, maybe not if you live in Texas… In any event, where we had not yet painted, we have the heat blisters to prove what happens when skin comes in contact with galvanized aluminum exposed to the sun.  Once the paint was applied, we were able to sit comfortably on the white metal roof while painting other sections.  The difference between the untreated and the treated metal is somewhere on the order of 50° cooler temperatures, which, obviously, makes cooling the house much, much easier.

Add tinted windows, additional weatherstripping for our doorways (if you live in the Brazos Valley, your foundation has shifted, is shifting, or will shift soon), and paint on the interior and exterior walls with a ceramic micro-tile additive, and we’ve done everything we can to minimize the expense of surviving the interminable Texas summer.

Water Heating/Clothes Washing and Drying:  Water heating expense is inextricably entertwined with clothes cleaning.  Given how hot it is in Texas, hot baths are not really a huge expense for us – there are times, of course, when this luxury is necessary, but warm is plenty hot enough, usually.

Clothes, on the other hand, don’t really require hot water at all.  Again from the Energy Star web site, “Hot water heating accounts for about 90 percent of the energy your machine uses to wash clothes - only 10 percent goes to electricity used by the washer motor.”  Given that most of the cleaning done in a washing machine is done via solvent qualities of soap and friction from clothes rubbing against each other, coupled with scrubbing agents like baking soda, most wash can be done in entirely cold water.  “Switching to cold water can save the average household more than $40 annually (with an electric water heater) and more than $30 annually (with a gas water heater).”  Sounds like free money to us.  If it weren’t so blasted humid here most of the time, we would also take advantage of Passive Solar Textile Dehydration technology more often, too.  (That’d be a “clothesline” for you pre-21st century thinkers.)

Food Storage:  Of the numerous advantages of eating fresh produce, one of the easiest to overlook is the energy saving possibilities.  The supersized refrigerator is an essentially American phenomenon.  It is, sadly, starting to become more popular throughout the world, but we are hoping that this trend desists, particularly as fresh foods make a comeback.

When you visit European households, one of the first differences you notice between the American way of doing things and the European style of living is that mealtime is much more deliberate.  There are no huge refrigerators full of weeks and weeks worth of food.  You make a trip to the market – and markets are smaller and closer for this very reason – and pick up fresh produce for the specific meal you are about to prepare and then eat.

There are several ramifications to this way of doing things.  For one thing, portion sizes are much more reasonable.  You don’t buy three times as much as you need.  Also, there is much less waste.  You eat what you have prepared; it doesn’t sit in the refrigerator where you will then a week later say “I meant to eat this before now, but since it’s moldy, I’ll just throw it away.”

And the refrigerator in which it is not sitting getting moldy?  It’s a much smaller fridge.  It typically looks more like what American families buy for their kids’ college dormitory rooms.

We at Myrtle’s place have such a fridge.  A miniature fridge, by most people’s way of thinking.  It goes where our dishwasher used to be.  It consumes much less electricity on an annual basis than the typical refrigerator, and it makes us much more deliberate in our food choices – we don’t do “leftovers” very often.  If “leftover” food does not fit in our tiffins for lunch at work or school the next day, then it is fed to the chickens.  The refrigerator is for storing dairy, butter, and condiments.  “Leftover” is a four-letter word.

Food Preparation:  We probably have some room for improvement on this score.  We use an electric stove/oven, which is in and of itself less efficient than would be a gas cooking station, but we just plain prefer not to have gas lines in our home.  Maybe we’re just superstitious.  However, there are several tips on the Energy Star web site for reducing energy usage in food preparation.

1. Use the right sized pot on stove burners. A 6" pot on an 8" burner wastes over 40 percent of the burner's heat.  Using the right sized pot on stove burners can save about $36 annually for an electric range, or $18 for gas.
2. Covering pots and pans also helps you cook more efficiently and keeps your kitchen cooler.
3. Have a gas range? Keep the burners clean to ensure maximum efficiency. Blue flames mean good combustion; yellow flames mean service may be needed to ensure the gas is burning efficiently.

We don’t use a microwave, nor do we use a lot of other countertop gadgets.  In fact, something we do purely for taste has the added advantage of costing us less, too -- we use a french press for our coffee instead of using an electric drip coffee maker.  We boil water on the stove, and then pour that water over the coffee grounds in our french press, and let it steep.  This makes for the best tasting coffee in the world, at a fraction of the energy costs associated with the typical countertop coffee machines.


Dishwashing:  It’s easy to understand why dishwashers became popular, particularly when listening to our daughter complaining that washing dishes is “the single most disgusting thing anyone has ever been asked to do, anywhere”.  However, this is an expense we simply cannot abide, particularly given that dishwashers are among the worst culprits at outgassing in the home.  Formaldehyde and chlorine droplets in the air are telltale giveaways that the dishwasher has been in use.  This, more than anything else, is why one of the first things we did when we bought our house was to tear out the dishwasher and replace it with a mini-fridge. 

It’s a better use of space, and it doesn’t cost us anything in additional electricity.  The water was going to get heated anyway, as it is when we wash by hand.

Computer/Entertainment:  We are extremely fortunate to be a family of bookworms.  We spend too much time on the computer, no doubt, but at least our usage of other forms of electronic brain composting are extremely limited.  This, no doubt, helps with our energy expenditures.

Lighting:  Rheostat, rheostat, rheostat!  It’s on the to-do list, we promise!  In addition to turning off lights in rooms where you are not using them, going with fluorescent wherever possible, using solar powered lights for all exterior fixtures, etc., using dimmer switches for all overhead lighting fixtures is one of the best possible ways to trim energy use.  A rheostat allows you to only access as much energy for a given lighting job as is actually required in order to give you only the light you need, no more.  Installing a dimmer is a relatively painless task; just make sure you turn of the proper breaker before messing with the wall switch.

We are not, by any stretch of the imagination, the crème de la crème of conservationists on the home energy front yet.  We have a very, very long way to go before we are satisfied on this score.

But to return to the sailing metaphor, if you picture going from the supersized frigate mentality which has driven American lifestyles for more than half a century to a leaner, meaner, sleeker sloop mentality, there are two elements to consider.  First is forming a reduced size hull capable of handling both shallow and deep water without getting swamped; next comes fitting that base with rigging – sails capable of maximizing speed and agility to allow for lightning maneuverability regardless of weather.

Getting off the grid by going to solar energy and home small-turbine wind are examples of setting up powerful rigging.  Getting rid of energy consumption hogs like an oversized refrigerator or a dishwasher, those are examples of downsizing the hull.  We’re halfway there.  Myrtle’s place is doing everything we can to get ship-shape; we hope you join us in this quest.

Happy sailing!