Expert: Richard Taylor, AIA - 11/1/2003

Question
I am considering buying new construction.  The buiders are Energy Star builders who are also listed as doing solar power.  I was wondering, in your opinion, if this would be a feasable thing to do with new construction.  If so, could I get solar power and electric base board heating, making the sun pay for my heating bill (and cooking, washing and dryer bill)?  

Also:

In your opinion, please tell me if having a furnace for central air is the best way to cool a house, or the new way of putting it through the walls is better.

I plan on having a two story home built, about 2000 sq feet hopefully fininshing the basement.  Does this have any bearing on either of the above subjects?

Would the above mentioned issues, if they can be done, cost me a fortune?

Answer
Doreen:

Energy Star doesn't mean anything particularly unusual.  Energy Star is an EPA program that rates building materials for their energy efficiency.  They don't exceed building code minimums by much, so although they're better, it's not a great leap.  Many builders who are Energy Star Partners do it just for the marketing bump.  You can find out more at www.energystar.gov.

Solar energy strategies comes in two varieties, passive and active.  Passive is about the layout of the house, type of glass, location of glass, orientation of the building, overhangs, etc.  It requires proper and careful design to work.  There are many sources of information on passive design - one of my favorites is Edward Mazria's "the Passive Solar Energy Book".  Passive design is much more that just facing South and it's effectiveness depends upon your location more than anything else.

Active solar strategies mean photovoltaic cells (solar panels) and similar means of turning sunlight into electricity.  This can be very expensive to install and maintain.  And it can be unattractive to add to a home.

Both strategies have one thing in common: you must have enough sunshine to make it work.  In my climate, it's cloudy most of the winter so solar gain is minimal.  It's nearly impossible to get a decent return on investment so we rarely use solar strategies.

But even under the best circumstances, any power you get from solar radiation won't take you off of the electric grid.  If you're after cutting your energy expenses, the best strategy is a combination of techniques: first, a well-designed home that puts the glass where it should be, doesn't waste space that you'll have to heat whether you like it or not, and takes advantage of whatever solar radiation is available.  It should use natural light instead of electric light; rooms you use in the morning should be on the southeast corner of the house, etc.

Second, good solid tight construction with high-quality materials and components including a high-efficiency heating and cooling system.

Third, a lifestyle that requires less energy: wear a sweater in the winter instead of heating the house to 75 degrees and open the windows to breezes in the summer instead of using the air conditioning (here's where good design will benefit you).  Remember when we used a clothesline instead of a dryer?

Finally, active and/or passive solar strategies.

The efficiency of heating and cooling systems depends upon the layout of the house and how much money you want to spend on the system.  The more you spend, the more efficient system you can get.  It's sort of a Catch-22.  The through-wall system you mention is a good choice if you will be spending most of your time in one part of the house.  Again, this is an architectural issue.  If you're going to be living throughout the whole house, a central air system will be more efficient in cooling the whole house.

A two-story home is usually pretty compact and therefore reasonably energy and cost efficient.  Just be sure that you consider how energy strategies will affect the design, and don't just "add solar" to a non-solar design.

Hope this helps!

Richard Taylor, AIA
Richard Taylor Architects, LLC
www.rtaylorarchitects.com