Tag: innovation

Greenovation: Spray Foam Your Home

  • While there are tax credits for spray insulation, credit is available for the material only, so the contractor should separate out the material and the labor costs.(Photo courtesy of the NREL)

When people talk about making their home energy independent, they often talk about solar panels and wind turbines. But before all of that, a home has to be tight. That’s not as exciting, but necessary. Lester Graham is following Greenovation.tv’s Matt Grocoff as he tries to make his home the oldest net-zero-energy house in America.

Transcript

When people talk about making their home energy independent, they often talk about solar panels and wind turbines. But before all of that, a home has to be tight. That’s not as exciting, but necessary. Lester Graham is following Greenovation.tv’s Matt Grocoff as he tries to make his home the oldest net-zero-energy house in America:

The note on Matt’s door told me to come on in and head for the basement. Matt’s 110 year old home has what’s called around here a “Michigan basement.” Basically, cement floor, stone walls, low ceilings. Not glamorous.

Matt is spraying expanding foam insulation up in that area where the floor framing sits on the foundation. The sill plate… which is basically nothing more than one-and-a-half inches of wood between inside your home… and the great outdoors.

“There’s no insulation between your house, or your living part, and the foundation itself.”

Maybe you’ve been in the basement of an old house and sometimes you can actually see daylight through the sill plate in places. Those leaks need to be sealed. That could be done with caulk. Then the area needs to be insulated. That could be done with fiberglass insulation.

“What we decided to do is to do both at the same time, seal and insulate, is to use a do-it-yourself spray foam insulation kit from Tiger Foam. There’s plenty of professionals out there, and for most people, that’s what I’d recommend you do, go to the professional. If money is an issue or if you’re a really handy person, these spray foam kits are fantastic.”

The foam insulation kit costs about 300-dollars. It’s basically two tanks -each about the size of a propane tank you’d use for an outdoor grill. A hose from each tank is attached to a spray gun that mixes the chemicals. The chemicals mix as they come out and the make a sticky foam that expands into nooks and crannies and then hardens after several minutes.

“Way easier than I thought they were going to be, by the way. I was actually terrified. I went back and read the instructions three – four times. And when I started spraying, it wasn’t that bad.”

“You still ended up with a goof, though.”

“I did have a goof. There was a little bit of foam there, dripping, when I forgot to turn on one of the canisters, but what ya– c’mon Lester.”

Matt’s goof means he’s going to have to wipe up some of the mess and spray again. But it’s not a disaster.

If you’ve got a big job… maybe new construction or a remodel that takes it down to the studs… you might want to consider a professional.

John Cunningham owns Arbor Insulation in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He says, sure, if you’re up to it… do it yourself.

“You could assume that it’d be cheaper to do it yourself and the kits are a really good option, especially for people that have smaller projects or they’re looking to do the work in a very specific time frame or in a distant location for instance.”

But the professionals are recommended for those big jobs. And right now there are federal tax credits for spray foam insulation– 30-percent up to 15-hundred dollars. That credit is limited though.

“The tax credit is available for the material only, so the contractor should be separating out the material and the labor. Also, there are additional incentives from some utilities and more incentives coming down the pike.”

Some states and even municipalities are considering incentives.

One final note… to use the spray foam, Matt Grocoff is decked out in a white haz-mat suit, latex gloves, goggles and a respirator…

“You’ve got to take all the safety precautions. You’ve got to wear your goggles, your suit. And it also can be messy too. Any overspray that gets in your hair will stay in your hair.”

And as he zips up, I get the hint that Matt has to get back to work.

“I do. I’ve got 30 seconds before this nozzle sets up. So, Lester, thanks again.”

“Sounds like my cue to get out of here. That’s Matt Grocoff with Greenovation-dot-TV. I’m Lester Graham with The Environment Report.”

“Thanks Lester.”

Related Links

Interview: Lynn Scarlett Defends Policies

  • Lynn Scarlett is the Assistant Secretary of the Department of Interior's Office of Policy, Management and Budget.

As the campaigns for President advance, President George W. Bush’s environmental policies are being examined. The Bush administration has been criticized by many of the large environmental groups. But Bush supporters say the White House approach to environmental protection is working well. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham talked with one of the architects of the Bush environmental policy, Lynn Scarlett. She is Assistant Secretary of the Department of Interior’s Office of Policy Management and Budget. Scarlett says the Bush approach to the environment goes beyond just punishing polluters, but encourages everyone to do more:

Transcript

As the campaigns for President advance, President George W.
Bush’s environmental policies are being examined. The Bush
administration has been criticized by many of the large environmental
groups. But Bush supporters say the White House approach to
environmental protection is working well. In the second of two
interviews, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
talks with the Assistant Secretary of the Department of Interior’s
Office of Policy, Management and Budget, Lynn Scarlett. She’s one
of the architects of the Bush environmental policy. Scarlett says the
Administration’s approach to the environment goes beyond just
punishing polluters, but encourages everyone to do more:


SCARLETT: “You know, our vision is one of cooperative conservation. Some years ago the
great conservationist Aldo Leopold talked about a nation of citizen-stewards, that we can’t get the
conservation job done and the environmental job done unless each person in their own backyards
and working together engage in conservation and environmental entrepreneurship, if you will.
So, for us, we’re trying to seek those partnerships, partnered problem-solving, we’re trying to
emphasize innovation and what I like to call environmental entrepreneurship, the imagination of
many minds creatively figuring out how to reduce our environmental footprint and then working
in cooperation across a mosaic of landscapes, public lands, with private landowners and across
the country.”


LG: “It would seem that an approach like that would require a lot of volunteerism in the private
sector and many times that volunteer effort has been lacking. It seems that we need some kind of
regulation from the federal government or from the state governments to make sure that the
environment is protected.”


SCARLETT: “You know, the vision is a multi-faceted one. Of course, we have, since Earth Day
1970, a whole suite of environmental laws that were unfurled, our banner environmental statutes,
and we are very committed to ensuring compliance with those statutes. So, the question is really
a matter of emphasis. As we go forward in the 21st century, I think the question we all have to
ask is: ‘How do we get to that next step of environmental progress?’ We build upon the
regulatory achievements, but we have to begin to ask ourselves ‘How can we work together to get
that next increment of progress. And when you look at what’s actually going on in the nation,
you see tremendous cause, I think, for optimism.”


LG: “There are no doubt some innovative ideas popping up out of the private sector to deal with
environmental concerns, but the Big Greens, the environmental organizations, are issuing scathing
reports about the record of the Bush administration. And they would disagree with your
characterization that we’re making progress. They would indicate that we’ve lost ground in
environmental protection.”


SCARLETT: “You know, I think that we have to look at the actual results on the ground.
There’s always politics at play, of course, in conversations about environment, but the real test of
success is on the ground and also the kinds of commitments that we’re tangibly making. I like to
say environmental progress is a journey not a destination. There’s always more to be done. But,
this administration has the highest dollars ever expended by any administration going towards
environmental protection whether it’s on the pollution side and pollution clean-up or on the land-
management and conservation side. We have a number of new programs. The President initiated
a landowner incentive program. It’s one patterned after what he had done in Texas to try to
stimulate and engage people to participate in species protection, particularly ‘at risk’ and
‘threatened’ and ‘endangered’ species. He inaugurated a private stewardship grant program with a
similar focus. So there’s an awful lot that is occurring that is getting results on the ground.”


LG: “Well, let’s try to get to the nut of the philosophical difference between the Bush
administration and many of these environmental groups who find great fault with the Bush
administration’s approach to environmental protection. What do you think the key differences are
between the White House perspective on the environment and these environmentalists?”


SCARLETT: “I think the fundamental difference, the major reorientation of philosophy is to say
‘You know what? Real success doesn’t reside necessarily in numbers of enforcement actions
taken, but rather results on the ground.’ And that there are a whole array of tools to achieve that,
many of which are outside Washington. All Americans want clean air. They want clean water.
And real success resides in inspiring them and working with them and partnering with them. And
I think the record will tell a very good tale.”


HOST TAG: Lynn Scarlett is Assistant Secretary of the Department
of Interior’s Office of Policy, Management and Budget.

Related Links

Diesel Maker Works Toward Cleaner Engines

The Environmental Protection Agency last year set new emissions standards for diesel truck engines. Most of those engines are manufactured in the Midwest by Indiana-based Cummins, Michigan-based Detroit Diesel, Pennsylvania-based Mack Truck, and Illinois-based Caterpillar. One of those companies is trying a different approach to meet the new standards. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:

Transcript

The Environmental Protection Agency last year set new emissions
standards for diesel truck engines. Most of those engines are
manufactured in the Midwest by Indiana-based Cummins,
Michigan-based Detroit Diesel, Pennsylvania-based Mack Truck,
and Illinois-based Caterpillar. One of those companies is
trying a different approach to meet the new standards. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:


A truck engine the size of a
small couch is up on blocks at the
testing center of Caterpillar’s engine
research division just
outside of Peoria, Illinois. When it starts up,
you can feel
the vibrations.


(ambient sound, engine)


While this engine for a typical 18-wheeler is
large and loud,
the engineers who designed it say what makes it
different is
very small. Tana Utley is an engineering
director for
Caterpillar.


“We actually talk about the amount of fuel
that an injector
injects in terms of cubic milliliters. We measure the
time in
milliseconds. And even the degree of accuracy that is required to
measure what we are doing is not unlike what you’d find if
were to go to the space program and look at some of the things
they do for NASA.”


Caterpillar is trying a different approach to reduce
pollution from the engines on vehicles like school busses, dump trucks,
and 18-wheelers. Other engine makers are using a process
called
cooled exhaust gas recirculation. That essentially
means
cooling off the exhaust from the engine that
includes
pollutants, and running it back through the engine
instead of
releasing it into the air. Cooling the exhaust makes it
easier for
filters to pick up pollutants, and reduces the amount of
outside
air required to run the engine. But Caterpillar says it has a
better system. They call it ACERT, or Advanced
Combustion
Emissions Reduction Technology. ACERT doesn’t bank
on one thing
to clean up engine emissions like its competitors.
Tana Utley
says it is a combination of dozens of improvements to
the way a
large diesel engine works. She says one
example is a second
turbine placed at the end of the
engine.


“When we put a series turbo on, what we
do is we take the
exhaust energy that would normally be wasted and go out to the
environment at that temperature, the
second turbine takes that
temperature and turns it into useful work. That useful
work is used to add energy to the intake air, which helps us to
reduce the
fuel consumption. It also provides plenty of cool, clean air to
the engine to give us clean combustion.”


Utley says improvements to the engines air intakes,
fuel
injection systems, and the electronics
that run the engine all
combine to make for cleaner exhaust. John Campbell is
Caterpillar’s director of On-Highway Engine Products. He says
the ACERT engine follow Cat’s mission of taking a comprehensive
approach to solving problems.


“Who invented ACERT? The answer is Caterpillar invented ACERT.
Because it took a series of people with all kinds of
different
backgrounds, working together, and if you will,
playing off of
each other. And ACERT development
was a true teamwork effort
among a broad-based skill of people to make it occur and
actually bring it to production.”

Campbell says because ACERT does not rely on one piece of
equipment or technology to comply with new standards, Cat
will
have an easier time of meeting the next round
of emission
standards in 2007. But not everyone
shares Caterpillar’s
confidence that ACERT will be the clear
leader in the engine
market. Mike Osenga is the publisher of
Diesel Progress, an engine trade magazine. He says Caterpillar’s
unique approach to the engine market goes beyond the technology.

“The interesting thing that Caterpillar did with
ACERT is they
said, not only does it, in their opinion, change
the game
technically, but they also intended to charge more for ACERT
equipped engines. Especially the truck engine
market is hugely
price competitive. So Caterpillar has said
they’re coming in
with a new technology and they intend to get more
money for it.
That is typically not a path taken in moving a technology
into to a market.”

Osenga says it is impossible to predict which technology will
prevail, or which engine manufacturer will have an easier time
meeting future emissions standards. He says the biggest
question mark is durability. Osenga says none of the engines
currently on the market have been tested for the hundreds of
thousands of miles trucking companies demand from their engines.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.

The ‘Cause’ of Pollution

It’s hard for non-profits to raise money. And it’s hard for big business to gain public trust and admiration. But when the two are put together – struggling non-profits and wealthy businesses – it appears to be a win, win situation. Or is it? Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Julia King looks at one summertime case where the environment is the loser:

Transcript

It’s hard for non-profits to raise money. And it’s hard for big business to gain public
trust and admiration. But when the two are put together – struggling non-profits and wealthy businesses – it appears to be a win, win situation. Or is it? Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Julia King looks at one summertime case where the environment is the loser:


How many times have you heard these words: Come on: it’s for a good cause!


You know, like the elementary school teacher who takes a water balloon in
the face for literacy. “That’s the spirit!” we cheer. Because sometimes
you’ve got to go out on a limb to inspire people to action, to get things
done.


But what if someone asked you to smoke cigarettes… to fight world hunger?
Or toss motor oil in a lake… to help cure diabetes? So, there are bad ways
to call attention (and funding) to a cause. Water in face: good. Motor
oil in lake: bad.


Yet more and more these days, our “causes” are tangled up in elaborate
marketing schemes that muddy the moral waters of both charity and activism.


Recently on a 95-degree Ozone Alert Day, my local news reported that area
residents could brave the hot weather (not to mention the respiratory
damage) and test drive a BMW… for a good cause. Without the slightest bit
of irony in her voice, the anchor segued from a story about the dangers of
ozone, to a story about the joys of driving (the very thing that leads to
ozone on a hot day).


With what they call “The Ultimate Drive” campaign, BMW has helped the Susan
G. Komen Foundation raise over three million dollars (a dollar a mile) for
the fight against breast cancer. That’s a lot of carbon monoxide for
breast cancer.


Collaboration. Cooperation. Call it what you will, but the you-scratch-my-back-I’ll-scratch-yours-fundraiser is hot. Big corporations draw big money for worthy causes, and worthy causes draw favorable publicity for big corporations. But what if those big names are at cross-purposes with the fundraiser’s end goal? Or even at cross-purposes with other worthy efforts?


If good health is a goal, for instance, it hardly makes good sense to ask
people to drive on ozone alert days – even if the car IS a BMW. The Komen
Foundation also sponsors walks and runs – far more appropriate activities
considering the cause.


Nobody wants to see environmentalists (or asthmatics) duke it out with
breast cancer patients, but it’s time for organizations to fundraise with an
eye toward more than just money. Innovation and creativity is great, but
when the public is asked to participate in an activity, it ought to be a
positive one.


Now, I’m waiting for someone to ask me to drink margaritas… for world peace,
of course.


Julia King lives and writes in Goshen, Indiana.

Utilities Prepare for Summer Demand

As summer approaches power companies will brace for rising demands for
electricity. During peak demand periods in past summers, utilities have
been caught short of power. However, deregulation of the electric power
industry has led to some innovative changes. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Computer Recycling

Personal computers are quickly becoming as common in American households
as TVs and telephones. But unlike those appliances, computers become
obsolete at a much faster rate. And while many computer owners abandon
their machines after just a few years of use, others think they still
have a lot of value. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Steve Frenkel
reports:

Windpower Manufacturer Gets Government Boost

Advocates of renewable energy are hoping the deregulation of electric utilities will give solar and wind energy a chance to flourish. A small company in Duluth, Minnesota thinks they have designed a new wind-power electric generating system that will work equally well on Midwestern farms and in small villages in the developing world. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Computer Recycling

Personal computers are quickly becoming as common in American households as T.V.’s and telephones. But unlike those appliances, computers become obsolete at a much faster rate. And while many computer owners abandon their machines after just a few years of use, others think they still have a lot of value. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Steve Frenkel reports:

Commentary – Disposable Pride

Modern inventions are designed to make our lives easier. But as Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston points out, sometimes easier isn’t always better: