GreenBuild Blog

Monday, August 09, 2010

Time to Put Rainwater Harvesting into Every Green Building Project?

Capturing the free water falling from the sky is gaining popularity in the U.S. and in other countries as diverse as Australia and Germany. When considering rainwater harvesting, we usually think of the “active” variety. Active rainwater harvesting combines collection and storage with on-demand use and is an excellent way to supplement residential and commercial water supplies, because rainwater is soft and free of disinfectants, salts, minerals and human contaminants. The majority of rainwater captured in this manner is used for irrigation and flushing toilets. With today’s water prices, rainwater collection and reuse systems typically have medium-to long-term payoffs. However, there may be other financial benefits for commercial projects such as reduced sewage collection costs and lower water meter fees (because a project might need less municipal water.) “Passive” rainwater harvesting, on the other hand, is less expensive. This form of rainwater harvesting typically falls into the realm of landscape design/construction professionals and involves studying the land and its natural water flows, with the goal of directing runoff to plant basins or areas where it can be infiltrated directly into the soil or via a pervious pavement or other surface. We’re going to see a lot more of both varieties of rainwater harvesting in the next decade, as urban water crises occur more frequently,  requiring project designers to come up with new water-conserving approaches for building projects. Read more in Chapter 9 of my new book, Dry Run, available on this site for free download.

Posted by Jerry on 08/09/2010 at 09:17 AM

This entry has been viewed 6 times.

Water Efficiency • Green Building News • Permalink



Tweet

Avoiding Future Urban Water Management Crises

We know that water supply, treatment, distribution and wastewater treatment uses significant amounts of energy, in California nearly 20 percent of all electricity use. We also know that “nega-gallons” of supply from water conservation and efficiency programs are far cheaper than most energy efficiency programs now in place around the country. We also know that pricing is a key tool for reducing water demand, one that is just beginning to be utilized in many parts of the country. In Las Vegas, there are programs in place to reduce water use by 50 percent from recent demand, to meet a dwindling supply of water from the Colorado River’s Lake Mead, its main water supply source, using four main methods: pricing, education, incentives and regulation. The water-energy nexus will continue to challenge both water and energy planners in the decades ahead, where there is not enough energy for future water demands and not enough water for future energy demands, unless we dramatically change how we approach both issues. By recognizing their “Siamese twin” interaction, we’ll be able to make better water resource decisions for the future. Read more in Chapter 4, now available for download from this web site.

Posted by Jerry on 08/09/2010 at 09:06 AM

This entry has been viewed 6 times.

Water Efficiency • Green Building News • Permalink



Tweet

Monday, August 02, 2010

The Water/Energy Nexus:  Saving Water Saves Energy & Reduces Emissions

In the production of energy, water provides cooling for thermoelectric power plants, both fossil and nuclear and – surprisingly—also for concentrating solar power plants. This is one reason why concentrating solar power is a bad choice for most desert areas, since their groundwater resources are so precious (and a good reason why it will never get off the ground in most parts of the world!)

The water/energy connection is particularly strong in places where water has to travel long distances from source to city, such as Southern California. Water supply and wastewater treatment account for 19 percent of California’s statewide electricity use and 32 percent of all natural gas use, generating 106 million annual metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions.

Recognizing the water/energy nexus, the City of San Antonio’s energy supplier and water agency partnered to combine wastewater treatment costs with power plant cooling costs.  One of the city’s sewage treatment plants discharges its highly treated sewage into a lake that provides cooling for the nearby electric power plant.

In the coming decades, the water/energy nexus will continue to challenge water and energy planners, and I expect to see more such partnerships and creative undertakings in the future. One way to avoid taxing the energy and water systems is to rely much more on photovoltaic solar and wind power to provide the electric energy for moving and treating water. Read more about the water/energy nexus in Chapter 4 of my new book, Dry Run: Preventing the Next Urban Water Crisis, released last June by New Society Publishers.


[Table:  4.1 ]
Energy use for the water cycle in Southern California is dominated by conveyance (transportation), because of both the distances involved and lifting water more than 3,000 feet to get over the Tehachapi Mountains. In Northern California, most of the water supply flows by gravity from the Sierra Nevada to the urban centers.

                                                         

Supply Component	Northern California kWh/million gallons	Southern California kWh/million gallons
Conveyance	150	8,900
Water Treatment	100	100
Distribution	1,200	1,200
Wastewater Treatment	2,500	2,500
Regional Total	3,900	12,700

Source: California Energy Commission, California’s Water-Energy Relationship, Final Staff Report, 2005, available at: www.energy.ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-700-2005-011/CEC-700-2005-011-SF.PDF.

 

Posted by Jerry on 08/02/2010 at 03:34 PM

This entry has been viewed 8 times.

Water Efficiency • Green Building News • Permalink



Tweet

The New Normal in Building Construction? Redirect your Marketing Focus!

We’re into the fourth year of the construction slowdown and ENR’s July 19th issue shows a “weaker than anticipated rebound” in residential construction, up less than 2% from 2009’s abysmal showing, and “massive double digit declines” in many non-residential building markets, including 60% decline in lodging, 40% in private office buildings, 35% in other commercial building work and 31% in manufacturing construction. Private school and healthcare markets were down 20 percent and 19 percent, respectively. Total private construction was down 15 percent year-to-date from 2009 and total construction (including government) was down 12 percent. This is far from the end. For example, the decline in employment the past four years and the “jobless recovery” mean that many office buildings won’t be fully occupied for years to come. We’re massively overbuilt, bottom line, for any reasonable economic demand. The fact that green building continues to grow only demonstrates that it has become the New Normal, not that overall conditions are recovering anytime soon. The decline in new building construction also means that more money will be devoted to building retrofits and upgrades by owners, showing design and construction firms where they should be placing their marketing emphasis.

Posted by Jerry on 08/02/2010 at 09:15 AM

This entry has been viewed 6 times.

Green Building News • Permalink



Tweet



Page 2 of 53 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >  Last »