How to Green Your Electricity

Switch as many of your light bulbs to Light Emitting Diode bulbs... Treehugger has been a big news breaker of LED innovation and new commercially available bulbs. Do a keyword search. For every bulb you replace, you knock down electrical consumption by a dramatically stupid amount. The work of an incandescent 60watts is done by a 2watts LED buld, with the same amount of illumination, and to boot, it runs "cool" so in the summer months, lighting doesn't trigger the air conditioning.
www.rockthereactors.com has joined forces with Earthtech Products to supply the 2000Mw of power the Governor of New York is asking for to shut down the Indian Point nuclear power plant.

Thanks for the big piece. One factual matter: I'm not sure that the "vast majority" of electricity comes from coal. According to this page from the Energy Information Administration -- -- it's a smidge LESS than 50%.

One other comment -- Energy Star is great in some ways, but it can be super-deceptive in others. Energy Star rates appliances (and houses) within size classes, so it will often "approve" things that are way way oversized and use a lot more energy than NON-energy star appliances (and houses) that are of a reasonable size. Only get appliances as big as you really need.

And just to second green power -- I've had in from my power company for like 5 years, and nothing could be easier. Cheers!

Great article, and a great collection of resources.
A word on RECs and offsetting.
I work at a not-for-profit that does offsetting as one of our core strategies to develop a sustainable model for our civilization. (The organization is called Zerofootprint.) We agree absolutely that the first and most important step is to get more efficient. If all we do is go out and generate more electricity, we'll inevitably find a way to use it all, in addition to all the dirty power we use now. So while we do broker EcoLogo (the Canadian version of Green-E)-certified RECs, we work with our clients to first cut back on their energy consumption. The goal is to cut the energy bill to the point that the savings cover the cost of the offset. In other words, renewable energy is generally going to be more expensive than fossil fuel-generated electricity, but it is more than viable if we use it efficiently.
At the same time, while companies or individuals are saving money, the value of the offset is flowing either to renewable-energy projects that would not be economically viable without the revenue from RECs, or to ISO-certified forestation programs. Since generating more electiricy is only part of the energy problem, and since deforestation accounts for about a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions, our offsets portfolio includes projects to protect old-growth forests, and others to reforest damaged land with the appropriate species of trees.
Offsetting is a very exciting sector of the environmental world, as we deal with people all the time who voluntarily step forward to do the right thing. It's great that offsets allow these people to act now, and not have to wait for far-reaching regulatory changes to impose a similar measures on everyone. If you'd like to know more about offsetting, or how to get the Zerofootprint Seal for your company (or your apartment!), please email us at info@zerofootprint.net, or visit www.zerofootprint.net.

"Solar panels, for example, have a great deal of energy embodied in them, much more than, say, a passive solar water heating system."

True, PV panels have more embodied energy than solar thermal panels, but PV panels don't have that much embodied energy. The payback is around the first 2 years of use. Then they produce for another 30 to 40 years.

Payback is around 2 years? For a subsidized system I'll assume. With out tax breaks and extra help PV systems are too cost prohibitive for most people. Anyone have a cradle to grave estimate of energy for PV's? That would be interesting. This is too
http://www.earthscan.co.uk/news/article/mps/uan/505/v/3/sp/

--
editor note: Energy payback isn't the same as cash capital payback.

A recent blog from Tesla used referenced data about energy in vs. energy out. And the time line for an energy resource of the system to go from negative to positive (i.e. the system making more energy then was used to make it.)

Pretty cool stuff.

Anyone have a cradle to grave estimate of energy for PV's?

Yes, and it has been shown to you on other threads about PVs when you made the same exact, misguided objections you're making now.

As always, your failure to pay attention is the problem.

Thanks for being so helpful anonymous. I never recalled any info on the amount of energy required for PV's to be made. I may have missed it. My bad. Would anyone truly helpful care to point to it again?

Editor, good point. The point still stands, most people think in terms of money.

I never recalled any info on the amount of energy required for PV's to be made.

Then you better work on your memory.

You probably already know that Solar Panels capture the sun’s energy to provide your home with electricity, but did you know that with the right equipment any unused power can be sold back into the energy grid so that no energy is wasted?

Build Green Inc - NY, CT: Residential building & renovation. Environmentally responsible homes.

www.buildgreeninc.com

Want to directly impact changing the energy grid to Solar Power? Become part of our viral distribution.

www.powur.com/dfwsolar

I was looking at buying solar panels for my home but the up front cost WOW $$$$. A little to much money for me.

Then I started thinking about putting together a business plan that would rent systems to people. I was just beginning the process then I found an alternate solution that gets rid of the headaches and large up front cost.

No System to purchase,
No permit hassles,
No installation cost,
No performance worries,
No maintenance fees and
No rate increases

And all of this while fighting Global warming and hitting Big Oil where it hurts right in the pocket book.

This removes the roadblocks to a Solar Grid.

Take direct action and convert to solar power. Reserve your greensystem today www.jointhesolution.com/dfwsolar

"The US power grid is 98% non-renewable energy (51.7% coal, 19.8% nuclear, 15.9% natural gas, 7.2% large hydroelectric, 2.8% oil,)."

How is hydroelectric included in the non-renewable energy sources?

The simplest way to make your own electric is to connect a 12VDC defroster/blower motor to a 12VDC car alternator.You can then wire the alternator to an isolator.This allows you to charge two 12VDC car batteries simultaneously.One powers the motor and the other can be wired to an inverter. Change the voltage on the alternator and you can charge large battery packs for vehicles or houses.The same 12VDC motor can be used if you connect it through a DC-DC converter. According to the U.S.Patent Office,this is NOT perpetual motion.These systems prove that we don't need fossil fuels or new technologies to stop Global Warming.The parts are all readily available and I know it works,because I built it. Build yours today!! By the way, try a 3 battery isolator or any other variations you can think of.

Great page... I was looking for a page with tips how to go green... congrats ,,, I even recomend your page on my blog

Hi, I am the founder of a for-profit company to develop energy projects to offset carbon emissions. And I’d like to comment on offsets and their quality.

I started working on renewable energy projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions back in 1996. After years of sweat and toil, I’ve developed only one project so far: But it’s a great reduction project; The Weber County Landfill Gas Project:
- Located in Ogden, Utah (Utah is a state dominated by coal-fired electricity generation ~95% of it is from burning coal).
- A gas collection system was installed in the abandoned Weber County Landfill to collect leaking methane (21 times more damaging than carbon dioxide) and built a small electricity generating plant that produces 950 kilowatts of electricity.
- This small project will only produce enough electricity to power about 750 homes, but it packs a punch in the offset area
- Because the generation of electricity converts methane to carbon dioxide, it generates offsets equivalent to a project 20 times the size.
- The project took a long time to develop, due to many; many hiccups, but it is finally is operational (2006).
- The county financed the project based on the selling the offsets generated form the project.

In the meantime, I’ve had many ups and downs and had to fold my first company and find work: But now I’m back and I have set up a marketing/development company: Cooler Skies Company in an effort to sell the offsets to support this worthy project: www.drivegreener.com and www.travelgreener.com (June 2007).
I also would like to encourage all Utahn’s to switch from Blue Sky Wind to plug into green America (July 2007) and support a great Utah project and a 100% green company.

I want Cooler Skies Company to be the first Fair-Trade Green Energy Company and build more reduction projects.

And now to my point, tree planting and reforestation are great endeavors and I donate to organizations, such as http://www.seedtree.org or www.treecanada.ca.

But as far as offset projects, they make poor quality offsets. Why? Well, for one thing, they are based on “future†sequestration of carbon dioxide which will occur over the life of the tree (100 years or so). How do you ensure the sequestration will occur? What if the forest is cut down, burned down or attacked by infestation? Remember the Mountain Pine Beetle? So, in my opinion, yes, plant trees, plant as many as you can and donate to organizations that do. An example: When the band Coldplay decided to offset their emissions from producing its latest album, it planted a mango farm in the vicinity of an impoverished Indian village. The 10,000 mango trees would soak up Coldplay's emissions, and the villagers would sell the mangos.
It all went well until there was a drought and the trees died – end of offsets

The best way of offsetting carbon is to cut down on your energy use: use less electricity, use less gas/diesel in the car. Carpool. Walk. Take the bus. Turn off the lights. Take fewer trips or combine trips, buy local as much as you can. Support farmers in your local area first. Tell your supermarket to buy local or you’ll shop somewhere else.

So now that I’ve knocked offsets from tree planting/reforestation, what’s a good offset? Well, good offsets are measurable and occur in real-time: When you build a renewable energy project that generates carbon-free electricity, this produces offsets in real-time: We know how much carbon the local power grid produces with every kilowatt-hour of electricity generated: That’s the baseline. Now when a renewable power plant comes on line, we can measure every kilowatt-hour of power that the plant supplies to the power grid. This displacement produces real-time, measurable offsets. Another good one is to capture escaping methane emissions: Just burning them creates an offset. This is known as a “conversion offset†and it is distinguishable from a displacement offset because it is the destruction (or conversion of a more potent greenhouse gas, methane into a less potent one: carbon dioxide). This too has a baseline and is measurable: You meter the methane coming into the plant, which has a specific energy content (Btu’s per cubic foot), and when that’s burned you can tell how much methane has been destroyed. This again, because it has a measurable definable baseline and can be accurately quantified is a good offset.

We now come to offsets from efficiency projects, which after reducing energy consumption through the installation of more efficient equipment, reduce energy, and therefore reduce emissions. This is more of a grey area because the baseline is harder to nail down: Often energy consumption patterns change with changing weather: colder days, hotter days, dark versus light days – these affect energy consumption for heating, cooling, lighting, etc. So, depending on the project, it can be harder to determine the baseline, and therefore quantify the reductions with a high degree of accuracy. Also, with any energy retrofit, there is a cost-saving involved and a payback.

Reducing energy consumption does reduce emissions. So, offsets based on efficiency projects are they a good thing? Maybe. But the price should reflect the uncertainty in the measurement.

What about certification? Well, certification does verify that you’ve met a standard, but what’s the standard? And what about the cost? Small renewable and alternative energy projects are expensive because they lack the economy of scale of large projects (say a 1,000 Megawatt coal plant). Certification adds a cost, and you, the buyer pick up that cost.

Also, certification bodies, will attempt to measure and rate a project on the basis of additionality: which is a fancy word for evaluating a project based on what basically turns out to be a thought experiment, somewhat along the lines of Schrödinger’s Cat. The big question is: Would the project have gone ahead without the sale of offsets? This question brings up so many “what ifs†that it gets dizzying. So when a certification body states that they evaluate additionality to a high degree of certainty, its balderdash. Certain firms in Europe sell credits based on efficiency upgrades undertaken in the third world. Is there a cost-saving be reaped as well? Yes. Also, projects don’t happen due to just economic considerations. What about the other non-tangible benefits of investing in an offset project? Do they affect additionality? For example, building development projects in the third world is not just about offsets, it’s about helping those less fortunate than us, that would explain why offsets from these projects sell at $40 Euros a tonne. Does it mean that the project would not have occurred without offset sales? Is it a foreign aid project? Maybe. Is it a certainty that it has high additionality? Not necessarily.

Certification can be done by any qualified, independent, third party that is qualified (knowledgeable) about the type of project under review. For energy projects, any good engineering firm will do: They know the technology. Some certification programs allow power from co-fired facilities (primarily electrical plants that use natural gas (a fossil fuel) to produce power).

Another example: When the G8 nations offset emissions from their 2005 meeting, they invested in an efficiency project to supply energy-saving light bulbs and fuel-efficient stoves to the residents of Cape Town, South Africa. The project cost so much to audit that the local town council wound up $35,000 in debt. The bottom line, expensive certification adds to the project cost, which makes the project harder to finance or prevents good projects from being built.

Also does it make sense to pay $40 Euros a tonne for an efficiency project, that’s hard to measure and expensive to audit, than a real-time reduction project in North America for $12 a tonne? Coal is cheap, energy use is going up. We need to start accelerating the construction of alternatives here, or we’ll end up falling behind as more and more coal plants are built.

So, what’s an eco-conscious citizen to do? Use less energy, that’s the best way.
And if you buy offsets, look for offsets that support real-time emissions reductions. Check out the project, and decide if its one you’d like to support: You are in effect, financing it. Some offsets are “blended†products, so you don’t necessarily know where your money’s going. Check out the price of offsets and look at the price vs. the quality. NGO vs. For-Profit? Your choice. Branded certification vs. certification by a qualified third-party? In my opinion, it’s the standard that’s important, and the independence and the qualifications of the firm doing the audit, not the logo. Ask questions. If it’s branded, is this needlessly adding to the expense? You may be paying for the added administration, but again your choice. Credits from the CCX? Ask to see their standards, I would.

So are offsets real? Yes, they are. Bottom line, they represent real reductions and real investments in renewable energy projects.

Are all credits created equal? No. Is one certification body better? Good Question.

No doubt I’ve stepped on a few toes, cest la vie. Confused? Welcome to the club. If you have questions, I’d be happy to answer them to the best of my ability, but if I get many questions, I may not get to yours, if I don’t, my apologies.
info@drivegreener.com or info@drivegreenerCanada.com

Here's an extra tip,

Use a thermos for your coffee and/or other hot beverages.

I have recently been doing some research on saving energy at my home and I found this energy cost calculator at this website that I found to be very useful.

http://members.tripod.com/~masterslic/appliance.html

Here's an example of what I found out using the calculator,

I looked at my coffee maker. A typical 10 cup coffee maker uses 900 watts. I would usually make coffee in the morning and leave the coffee maker on to keep the coffee warm until an automatic shut-off switch would turn it off after two hours. Calculating this usage it turned out that I was spending $13.92 a month or $167.23 a year to keep my coffee warm.

According to the calculator that is 1.8 kilowatts a day, over a years time that is 657 kilowatts a year. If this is multiplyed by 2.19 lbs of CO2 per kilowatt (for electricity generated by a diesel powered generator) it turns out that 2 hours a day with the coffee maker on over a year's time is 1438 lbs of C02 a year.

In order to correct this I bought a thermos carafe ($6.00) and started to put my coffee into the thermos after it was brewed. This allows me to turn off the coffee maker quickly. It takes about 15 minutes to brew the coffee and get around to putting it into the thermos; my costs were reduced to $1.74 a month or $20.90 a year. That's a savings of $12.18 a month or $146.33 a year.

CO2 emissions are reduced to 179 lbs of C02 so I have made 1259 lbs reduction in my CO2 emissions.

Next, I tried it on a coffee pot at my son's school. Their coffee maker uses 1090 watts and they leave the coffee maker on for 8 hours a day. This turns out to be about $824.00 a year to keep the coffee warm!

The CO2 emissions for this is 4782 lbs or over 2 tons of CO2!

And if you own a store:

I noticed a local store that uses two coffee makers that are likely in 1090 watt range and they are on for at least 10 hours a day. I did the caluculations for the two and it came out to $2,000 dollars a year on energy costs!

The CO2 emissions a year are over 4 tons!

In order to save this money and recduce the CO2 emissions stores can buy high quality stainless steel pump thermoses for $50.00 to $60.00 each and save a substantial amount of money each year and recduce the emission of tons of CO2 into the air.

Here is an example of a stainless steel pump thermos,

http://www.thermos.com/Product_detail.aspx?CatCode=PUMP&SubcategoryID=8&ProductID=517#

And here is the cost of the thermos,

http://www.helpfindit.com/cgi-win/dream55.exe/~i058000215478

There may be better thermoses out there, this one is just for an example.

(Note: I live on an island in the South Pacific where electricity is .25 cents a kilowatt hour so you may not save as much, but I'm sure there will still be worthwhile savings and reductions in CO2.)

Try the calculator out and see how much you will save using a thermos.

I asked my local electric company if this was possible and I got this patronizing letter back. It was very disappointing and I really didn't know how to respond.

Dear Heather Pritchard,
>
> Thank you for visiting Southern California Edison's Web site.
>
> Technically, no major utility could offer its customers the option of buying all-green power, no matter the price they might have to charge.
>
> All electrons are exactly alike regardless of the energy used to generate them. Therefore, electrons cannot be piped into the power grid then directed toward one customer or away from another based on the fuel used to generate them. Once they hit a utility's wires network, they immediately mix with all other electrons and race toward all customers at the speed of light.
>
> Also, there are limitations to renewable energy sources that make it impossible to serve customers exclusively with green power. Obviously, our customers want the lights to come on when they throw the switch, whether or not the sun is shining and the wind is blowing. So the only way to manage a power grid is with a mix of renewable and traditional generation sources.
>
> We are pleased to say that Southern California Edison is the nation's leading purchaser of renewable energy -- electricity generated with wind, solar, hydro, biomass, and geothermal energy. Approximately 16% of all electricity flowing down Edison lines comes from renewable sources -- 13 million megawatt-hours per year to be exact. So, in a manner of speaking, one might say that our electrons are some of the greenest in the nation.
>
> In short, we share your commitment to doing all we can to protect the environment.
>

>
> We appreciate the opportunity to serve you.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> K. Dunn
> Customer Communication Organization
> Southern California Edison > If you have questions or need further assistance, please contact us by e-mail at www.sce.com or call our Customer Communication Center at 1-800-655-4555, which is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for your convenience.

"I asked my local electric company if this was possible and I got this patronizing letter back. It was very disappointing and I really didn't know how to respond."

I would say that letter is well written, as compassionate as possible in context, and technically correct. How about off-shore wind farms in California, electrons are electrons.

I am noticing a growing amount of paid nuclear energy propogandists who are showing up on green sites not to promote nuclear directly, but rather to bash solar PV. They would have us believe solar is not a solution and we must agree to nuclear power.

For the record, it does take energy to produce PV panels. Duh. It also takes energy to build and maintain a nuclear power plant. With solar PV that energy is paid back in 2 years of solar production. With nuclear, we will pay for our entire lives in the running of the plant not to mention the fact that we have to continually process, store, and monitor the poisonous radioactive waste.

It is intellectually dishonest for these paid nuclear promoters to go on green sites and pretend their concern is about PV manufacturing when their concern is about selling nuclear as a green option (which it most certainly is not.)

It really is not that hard to go green as a matter of fact it is down right easy! . Coal-fired power plants account for a third of U.S. CO2 emissions, the primary gas blamed for global warming, about as much as every plane, train and automobile in the country combined. Yet, most energy experts say the nation can't meet its energy demand for decades, at least, without a lot of coal.
The Edwardsport plant wouldn't be possible without the $460 million in local, state and federal tax credits it will receive, says Jim Stanley, president of Duke Energy Indiana. The federal 2005 Energy Policy Act authorized $800 million in tax credits for coal gasification projects to promote clean coal; $133.5 million was awarded to the Edwardsport project.
This money is comming out of our pockets people, along with the tax to pay you know that they are going to increase our rates per kilowatt hour.
If you are really serious about doing what you can do to help yourself and your fellow humans there are many solutions and here is the one I can help you with. Citizenre is a forward thinking company that will allow people to bring solar power to you home for next to nothing and you can lock in your current utility rate for up to 25 years. Just imagine 20 years from now paying the same utility rate as in 2007.
This is how it works. Go to www.AmericansWantSolar.com clik on register your home ( 26,000 + people already have) fill out the form, 2: you will recive an email from me , thanking you for jioning the solution and to get your zip code. 3: I will send you 2 paper to sign and mail. 4: An engineer will call and come to your home design a systen to meet your needs, you aprove the design and pay around a $500.-$1000. security deposit ( which you get back with intrest at the end of your term) your system gets installed and you are producing your own clean power for the next 25 years at your average utility cost in 2007. Is that simple or what? Jion the solution and tell all of your friend and family. Together WE CAN make a differance. Will Cochran

Amen on the great information. Energy audits—though a great way to shave money off your electricity bill and conserve precious energy—is still often an enigma to many homeowners. Great list Jacob!

By the way, RECs are quickly becoming one of the easiest and most economical ways to go green. Glad to see TerraPass and Green-e make that list. Both are very admirable and innovative organizations that work tirelessly to promote renewable energy.

For anyone interested, here's another place to offset your energy usage and purchase RECs:
GreenEnergyChoice

I think they should just shut down all the
"ungreen-ed" power plants after the end of this year or something, because a few people going a little green here and there isn't going to stop anything. The coal and nuclear plants are still there, and still ruining the panet. I mean honestly; give them a year or so to convert, or shut them down!!! THINK HERE PEOPLE!!!

My air conditioner causes most of the stress on my electricity use. If it wasn't for the necessity of A/C I could easily run my house 100% on solar power. I'm really looking forward to efficient and cheap solar panels.

Regarding Mike's comment that "I think they should just shut down all the
"ungreen-ed" power plants after the end of this year" --if 50 percent of the nation's homes and business are powered by coal produced electricity, which half of the nation is going to survive without power? Who decides which families don't get lights, refrigeration, air conditioning and which businesses have to just close the doors?
While I understand the passion behind your idea, it's just not reasonable. Climate change policy and energy policy must work in harmony to preserve affordability for the American family. Yes, change needs to occur, but it must be sustainable and the cure not worse than the problem. I'd be interested in feedback from folks who understand the differences in the Lieberman and the Specter bills that are in committee in the Senate right now. Pros and cons? I fear that federal legislation cave to special interest groups interested in making big dollars and not take far reaching consequences on affordabiility into consideration.

I would like to start by saying I am an environmental engineer and have been in this industry for over 10 years and I also do home inspections to help homes and business reduce their carbonfootprint and live a greener life. I like the way this site breaks everything down to make it understandable for everyone. Energy is something we take for granted every min. of every day.But if you have any questions regarding living a green lif please do not hesataite to contact me and I will be happy to help. My address is www.gogreenbusavingenergy.com and my personal email is mjmarx@gogreenbysavingenergy.com and I also do a blog every week with some helpfull information.and Treehugger please keepupthe great work

Little changes can make a big difference By being jut a little bit careful and by experimenting here and there my kids and I worked at cutting the amount of energy we used we cut our electric bill (money wise) in half small changes make a big difference

Passive solar fascinates me this summer we are building a passive solar hot water heater out of junk we find follow our story and plans to save energy and green up our part of the world at our blog

Suggestion #8: Buy green power. It was Treehugger that reported on a Florida Utility company that was caught using renewable energy customer's money for administration. Can Treehugger set up a reporting service nationwide so that scurrilous utilities can be reported and "brought to justice"? Since we no longer have adequate laws regulating utility companies, we need to report their abuses and build the case for re-regulation of this supposedly "natural monopoly". The rich and powerful take whatever they want, the law be damned.

What a great site and great comments.
What does one do when you live in Kentucky? a basically republican coal consuming state? I've wanted to go green for the past 5 years but have no resources or contacts to help me. Being a single parent on disability,no boyfriend to help and living in a 1950s flimsey box house is frustrating. Was trying to contact Leonardo for some kind of help but don't know how. Does anyone have any suggestions?
Frustrated in Kentucy

In my experience, the two simple things to do the save energy is to switch lightbulbs to CFLs and use power strips that you can turn off on your computer and TV with all of their accessories. Both are low cost and have very quick paybacks. Changing the 5 most frequently used bulbs in your house to CFL can save about $100/year.

Chris
www.everblueenergy.com

in Texas, because of deregulation, you can now switch to a green plan or provider. At first i thought that this would cost me more, but i ended up getting a better deal than i had previously. So now i can be green and save $$. Check out GreenEnergyChoice.com to see if green is available in your area or if you are interested in offsetting your energy with Renewable Energy Credits

I've changed from an indoor clothes drier back to a rotary clothes line - which I bought online from clothesline.com with free shipping and handling. I worry that I can't just switch off a lot of my standby appliances because they have clocks or in the case of T.V converter boxes, channel memory and they will either have to be reprogrammed when I switch them back on or I will see the digital clock display flash 12:00 interminably.

Why is every fortune 500 company marketing itself as Green?

Going green is no longer just a fashionable cause or even simply a political movement. Going green is a call to action for any business that wants to compete in the global marketplace today.

Customers demand an environmental awareness and at the same time they expect the best value. Now that the world is at their fingertips customers will not budge on either of these issues. Tough economic times just drive home the point that waste is not welcome in people’s day-to-day microeconomics.

We are a small company. Why is going green something we even need to be concerned with?

In order for small and medium companies to survive in this demanding new business environment you must adapt to the market place. In short, you must employ large company tactics to reducing your overhead, increasing your productivity, and eliminate your dependency on paper and ink products. It is the business equivalent of dressing for the job you want.

Great info. I'm one of those people building a new house to LEED for Home Platinum standard. It isn't easy, but we believe it's the right thing to do. We estimate at this point that the cost of the house is 10-15% higher due to our Green choices.

We use an electric company that has a 100% wind energy plan (Green Mountain Energy). Because of this we chose not to spend another $30,000 on solar energy. Neither Dallas nor Texas has any incentives for residential solar energy at this time and given our expected energy use in our new house we would have had to wait over 30 years for a full financial payback. We are, however, wiring the house for solar panels in case the future holds cheaper products and/or quicker payback.

I looked into wind energy, but most residential turbines are very expensive as well, and in Dallas the average wind speeds aren't enough to provide enough energy for a reasonable financial payback either.

So we've settled for Energy Star everything, low flow everything, triple glazed windows, whole-house encapsulation insulation, a drought-friendly landscape (that will cut our irrigation useage by 66%), and rainwater harvesting (for use in irrigation and clothes washing).

And....we'll be using 70% CFLs, and have our outlets switched to be able to turn off appliances and charging devices when not in use.

You can visit our website and blog at www.greenlabron.com.

green revolution is necessary for our mother earth
using most of solar as well as renewable energy makes tomorrow brighter