/diy/ - Do It Yourself

[Anonymous No.448140]

/diy/ I have a bit of a conundrum.

My girlfriend and I have been designing a new house for our family.

One of our main design staples is sustainability and green energy.

We plan an using primarily an outdoor wood stove along with a substantial solar water heater for our hot water, and this radiant heating.

We are also planning on starting a solar array on the roof, and expanding it yearly. Eventually we would like to reach 100% off the grid.

This brings my question. Obviously the highest energy usage devices are the water heater, stove, and clothes dryer.

Which would be the best choice? Use electric appliances, and spend a shit ton on my solar setup to support them?

Or use gas appliances, and use probably 300~ gallons a year?

I'm trying to find the best balance between practicality, cost, and lowest carbon footprint.

Any ideas?

[Anonymous No.448474]

>I'm trying to find the best balance between practicality, cost, and lowest carbon footprint.

Practicality is the only item on your list which can't be translated to cold numbers. A yuppie and a hippie would never agree what "practical" is - and even without going to the extremes it still is.

Do you want to retain an urbanite lifestyle AND live off the grid? Google "earthship" and "earthship for sale", would you and your family live in one?

[Anonymous No.448493]

>>448140
Just go electric and solar. Also, be sure to put your bedrooms and living areas on the south and east sides of the house (or north and east if you're in the southern hemisphere), so they catch maximum sunlight and natural heating. Stick the laundry areas, bathrooms and other non-frequent areas in the opposite side, away from the sun. And if you're in a warmer climate, be sure to design the floorplan such that wind can move through the house easily and continuously with minimum resistance.

[Dan No.448498]

Please hire an architect. For your sake, please do it.

[Anonymous No.448553]

Cool plans.

I think switching to gas just to get off the grid is in no way a green & sustainable solution. By all means, electricity!

Also even though a lot of the grid power is created burning fossil fuels, its overall efficacy still beats the wood stove - think about why you want to get off the grid, and try not to have a negative effect.

Where is the house located? Is warming or cooling an issue?

[Anonymous No.448561]

>>448140
>pic
>toilet waste going to nothing or used as compost

What a waste! That can be sent to a methane biogas generator where it can be turned into methane and high-nitrogen fertilizer. The methane can then be used like natural gas for cooking, heating, and electric generation.

[Anonymous No.449533]

>>448140
OK, you want a green, off-grid house?

Hire a pro to design a passive solar house. Bern the north side. Open floorplan, use in-floor radiant and wood fire as secondary heat sources. Friend of mine lives in a passive solar house, only burns 1-2 cords of wood each year. EACH FUCKING YEAR!

>using primarily an outdoor wood stove along with a substantial solar water heater for our hot water, and this radiant heating.
Yes, use a solar water heater for hot water.

>water heater, stove, and clothes dryer.
Already got the water covered. Solar
Stove - Electric is shit tier for cooking, but if you're ok with that, it's better for off-grid if you have solar panels hooked up. You could also use your wood-fired stove.
Clothes dryer - USE A FUCKING LINE!!! DRY IT INSIDE IN THE WINTER!!! (rack by the fire, or just leave it in the sun)

[Anonymous No.449548]

>>448498
We're just drafting the base plan, then it's all going to a tech for finalization.

>>448553
We're in SE Missouri. Winters and Summers are both slightly beyond mild. We're not concerned about cooling, just heating roughly October thru March.

As far as wood goes, we're on 120 acres, it's free.

>>449533
Thanks for the tips. And ya, the electric range being shit for cooking was one of my reasons for considering gas.

I'm certain the wood stove and solar water heater will take care of our hot water needs in the winter, but I'm concerned that the solar alone won't be able to keep up in the summer. Either way, the electric one I've looked at is a single element, so it's still feasible on solar power.

For the clothes dryer, we already do most of our drying on a line. We just want a backup for winter months. With us and 3 kids, we go through more clothes than I think would be feasible to dry inside.

[Anonymous No.449551]

>>448561
Man after my own heart.

As for the people going "hire a pro", I've met and spoken with some of the top guys in sustainable housing in the UK, and the best usually say they can help you "ask the right questions": ultimately only you know what you want and find the appropriate solutions. As far as looking for a "pro" to do it for you, sustainable housing is the new scam artist central. OP, design is an iterative process, just get some numbers and designs on paper and change them when you think of/find something better. I'd suggest to start very simple.

Oh, I also did do the numbers a while back for rainwater powering a turbine for a house. Unless you live in an enormous multistorey mansion, it's not worth the hassle. If you've got a separate system that can use relatively small amounts of power it can make sense, one of the examples in Practical Action's handbook for hydroelectric was a guy using an old motorbike inverter on his drainpipe to power a neon sign for his shop. And electrolysis of water definitely doesn't make sense.

[Anonymous No.449557]

as >>449551 said electrolysis + fuel cell is pure bull.
tech is being researched, but we don't have nearly enough efficient models to sustain its deployment, also using electricity to generate electricity is retarded as fuck. that said good luck with your project OP, just don't fall for plain scammers

[Anonymous No.449558]

>>448140
The best choice would be to get clean electricity from the grid and some from electricity produced at home.
It's not smart to go 100% off the grid if you haven't got enough experience from this type of living.
The picture you posted contained some really stupid things. You waste electricity when producing hydrogen and that setup would not work, that "hydro turbine" would probably produce about 1 watt in a year.

[Anonymous No.449781]

>>449551
>Oh, I also did do the numbers a while back for rainwater powering a turbine for a house.

I think it would only work well, for small homes, if you had a large cistern to capture the rainwater and built up enough to make it turn a newer, vertical, vortex-style turbine. Otherwise, it'd only be good for charging AA batteries if a cistern wasn't used. Then, the big cistern would essentially be a battery and only used when you need to use it. You'd start the water flowing and it create power only at that time for your electronics instead of charging a battery with it. Though, if the cistern was full, you could overflow it so that it would charge a battery array I suppose.

[Anonymous No.449819]

I loled at the "water tank"

Uh....you mean a well?

[Anonymous No.449822]

>>449819

Whoever made that probably lives in Cali or some place where there's no such thing as a water table and water can only exist in springs and rivers and such.

In any case, its usually a pretty bad idea to pump surface water directly into a house. Wells are a much better idea, as you can use the earth itself to do most of the filtration for you. Also usually tastes better than surface water.

Of course, you have to have a water table available for a well though....which most places do except in real shitty dry areas (like cali).

[Anonymous No.449823]

>>449819
>>449822
Look at the sources for the water in that water tank. It is from a spring, stream, or river. A spring is a type of well. Also, that tank also uses rainwater from the roof.

[Anonymous No.449892]

>>448474
>earthship
How have I never heard of these? They are fucking awesome.

[Anonymous No.450330]

>>448140
>spend a shit ton on my solar setup to support them?

it isn't expensive if you take advantage of the tax brakes.

[Anonymous No.450583]

Green house has maximum efficiency when the power grid cost are high in your country.

If power grid cost is higher or as high as electricity then it's best to consider such house.

[Anonymous No.450608]

>>449551
> did do the numbers a while back for rainwater powering a turbine for a house

Would you mind giving some specifics? How did you calculate it and what were the exact results?

[Anonymous No.450626]

Can you use that outdoor wood boiler for your hot water? Photovoltaic panels are so expensive, I would try to avoid running the water heater, stove, and clothes dryer off solar electricity.

[Anonymous No.450629]

>>450608
It's real simple to do stuff like that:
Look at annual rainfall (in inches or mm)
Multiply this by the area collecting rainfall (the roof)
That's the annual volume of water that can be collected. Convert to kg, and you have annual mass of water. Multiply this by the height of the roof and by acceleration due to gravity, you have total energy. This will of course be an overestimate.

Let's put in some stupid numbers, because in this case you can:
12 metres of rainfall a year (world record), 400m^2 roof (tenth of an acre), that gives 4.8 tonnes of water a year. Let's say it's a 20 metre (5 or 6 storeys) building, giving ~1000 MJ, and that's about 32W average per year, not taking into account turbine efficiency or storage. You can use them for transient small picohydro power, but that's about it. Maybe power a light or two in a downpour.

[Anonymous No.450632]

>>449892
They are fucking Terrible, you mean.

>>448140
Get a back burner on your woodstove. It's the same thing i use to heat my home throughout winter and it works like a charm; but it's definitely better internal. Always have a backup system, no matter what. If you have solar, have a generator stashed away somewhere, or gas lighting or something. The last thing you want is a similar situation to what i had three years back

>Snowed in
>No fuel for wood stoves
>Rolling blackouts because snow
>-10 to -18

I have never, ever been so thankful that i could walk to my friends' home who had a gas space heater.

[Anonymous No.450633]

>>450626
Use a parabolic mirror to warn water with solar power.
It's more efficient where you need heat instead of electricity.
Either that or a lens. If it's possible.

[Anonymous No.450641]

>>450608
Let me try that again...
It's real simple to do stuff like that:
Look at annual rainfall (in inches or mm)
Multiply this by the area collecting rainfall (the roof)
That's the annual volume of water that can be collected. Convert to kg, and you have annual mass of water. Multiply this by the height of the roof and by acceleration due to gravity, you have total energy. This will of course be an overestimate.

Let's put in some stupid numbers, because in this case you can:
12 metres of rainfall a year (world record), 400m^2 roof (tenth of an acre), that gives 4800 tonnes of water a year. Let's say it's a 20 metre (5 or 6 storeys) building, giving ~1000 MJ, and that's about 32W average per year, not taking into account turbine efficiency or storage, or that we're blatantly overestimating everything. You can use them for transient small picohydro power, but that's about it. Maybe power a light or two in a downpour.

[Anonymous No.450643]

>>450632
Here that doesn't always work. Gas often times freezes off. I've been 2 weeks without gas and electric while snowed in. However, I have a wood stove with a winter's worth of wood that I can access without going out into the snow.

I was using melted snow to flush my toilet. lol

[Anonymous No.450648]

>>450633
The sun only shines during the daytime, but you can burn wood any time of the day. Of course you can have multiple methods of heating water, and switch as needed.

[Anonymous No.450659]

>>450633
>>450648
The sun may only shine in the day time, but get yourself a nice insulated tank, accumulate hot water in the day and you can get hot water almost anytime. Get it heated up to just below boiling and use a cryogenic tank(aka giant fucking thermos) and it'll stay warm for about a month.

The Ben Franklin submarine used this method of thermal storage to keep water warm to cook food:
http://seawifs.gsfc.nasa.gov/FRANKLIN/IMAGES/POPULAR_MECHANICS/pop_mech_story.html

A backup is good though.

[Anonymous No.450660]

>>450641
I get E = mgh = 4800T * 20m * 9,81m/s2
~95MJ

=> power is 95MJ / 32 million seconds = 2W (not sure if I got it right)

which is even less so yeah, sounds correct. Damn...

[Anonymous No.450681]

>>450660
>=> power is 95MJ / 32 million seconds = 2W (not sure if I got it right)
It's about 950 MJ. I did something similar with the first post, which is why I deleted and reposted, it's a but of a pain to convert those numbers at the best of times.

Now if you consider that most very rainy places like Scotland will get at most 1/3 of that amount of rain per year, and that most houses are tiny compared to the example, you're getting a fraction of a watt. Hydroelectric can work really well and give a lot of power, but you need a lot of volume and height.

[Anonymous No.450687]

>>450681
Yeah, it's a bit like those weight lamps.
Falling things just aren't a good source of power.

[Anonymous No.450692]

There is an old, proven, sustainable way to pump water for home and irrigation.

Google "Aermotor windmills". They've been around since LONG before rural electrification.

If you can get electric power, run a service even if you don't use it much.

Subscribe to Farm Show magazine and get their DVD of past issues. A fuckton, no, MANY fucktons, of useful information.

Have a large LP tank and a gas heater. You don't have to turn it on unless you need it.

Become a skilled mechanic and general technician. If you want to live like you say you do, YOU need to be able to repair and maintain everything you own. THAT is key and will save you insane monies over your lifetime.

[Anonymous No.450694]

>>450687
I think if you can use it intelligently, it can be great. So the example in the earlier post above, about the guy using an old motorcycle alternator, I think he was in Brazil iirc, so when they had a massive downpour the alternator would turn on and power this little neon sign in his shop or bar or whatever it was. So of course people are going to see this inviting light the moment it turns gloomy and starts raining. Ta da, more customers. If you're using it to collect water for plants, you could possibly power a controller that only needs to be on when the water's on, or you could use hydraulic principles to control it via a mechanism powered by water (which is what we're seeing more and more with intelligent dam gates and things).

[Anonymous No.450721]

>>450694
And, the post about collecting lots of rain water in the tank and using the vertical axis turbine. That way you get real measurable power when it is finally released and acts like a water battery.

[Anonymous No.450723]

>>450694
Yeah and even though the average power is not much, if you only use it when it's raining it's at least something.
To compensate the loss of solar power when it rains, heh.
Most efficient power sources will of course be solar and wind by far.
But why not use every little bit, just keep the priorities and don't spend too much on something like this.

[Anonymous No.450726]

>>450721
You never get more energy than E=mgh states, because it's a law of physics. Unless you add water from somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.450729]

>>450726
I don't see the problem. It rains and fills a tank. when the tank is full you can dump the water any time you want through a vertical axis turbine. Those use the shortest fall height of any hydropower turbine.

You are only limited by the size of the tank and the ability of the rain to fill it from whatever your collection square area is.

[Anonymous No.450733]

>>450721
>>450729

Ah, that's right - you didn't imply it would increase the total energy.
With the tank you would get higher constant power for a limited period of time, which may be the most sensible solution to get power of it.
Still it's not that efficient, and you might want to rather store the water in the tank, than get a few hydro-watts for a few days.

[Anonymous No.450741]

Wow, this thread took off. Awesome.

Just to clarify for everyone, here's what we have planned.
Our house heating will come from 100% radiant floor heating, as it is the most efficient. The hot water will come from our water heater/storage tank system. The one I am looking at is a single element 4500W, with a lower heat exchanger.

My plan is;

In the WINTER, our outdoor wood stove will heat a glycol mixture, which will heat the water in the water heater/storage system. Our solar water heater will also heat the glycol mixture, though I highly doubt it will be necessary. The electric element will function just as a backup.

In the SUMMER, it would be incredibly wasteful to use the outdoor wood stove just for hot water. The solar heater, and the single 4500W element should easily meet our needs.
My main concern was with our stove, and clothes dryer. Gas is obviously far better for cooking. And we should only need to use the clothes dryer in the winter.

[Anonymous No.450780]

>>450741
So, uh, why's the wood stove outdoors? Doesn't that waste heat? As far as I understood, you'll need to warm the house at winter anyway.

How are you planning to do the solar heater? I've been wanting to try something like that but I haven't a place to do so.

About the electrics. I've been thinking, it would be a good idea to make a versatile internal "grid" so that you could add any number of inputs (little power plants) at any time. That way you depend on the grid at start, but can eventually add more and more power input when you have the time and after the house is otherwise done.

[Anonymous No.450801]

I have lived in a house with solar heat. We burred a 2000 gallon cement water tank in the back yard surrounded by two feet of foam on the bottom and sides and capped with a spray on roofing foam. We had a pellet stove and a propane boiler that only needed to run about two weeks a year and that was due to continued cloud cover.

[Anonymous No.450805]

>>450780
I presume he wants an outdoor stove to cook on during warmer times. In the olden days it was common to have a second stove outdoors or in a shed.

[Anonymous No.450807]

>>450741
Have you considered a ground source heat pump?

[Anonymous No.450829]

>>450733
It is the most efficient/useable use of a small drop for rain water from a typical house I can think of to create electricity.

[Anonymous No.450866]

>>450780

Outdoor wood stove....pic related. It's the only thing my other half wouldn't compromise on, or we would have it indoors. Regardless, I'm not concerned about wood usage or wasting heat from it. My wood supply is, in all practicality, limitless.

Since my solar power system will encompass most of my roof, I intend to use the peak, roughly 4' down each side, for solar water. They make panels without the storage tank on top, which I will use with a temperature controlled circulator to circulate water from the water heater/storage system.

>>450807
I have considered them. The initial cost is outrageous, and they use rediculous amounts of electricity. Pretty much just like running central A/C all year round. Definitely out of the question.

[Anonymous No.450936]

>>448140
I wish you good luck, I really like your idea, but
>I'm trying to find the (...) lowest carbon footprint.
You now realize that while reducing the energy consumption of the house, you're also increasing your reliance on energy-intensive made parts, some of which can consume more energy during production than they'll ever safe you during their lifecycle.

Depending on where you live, solar cells can be quite useless in "lowering carbon footprint". They're a great idea if you're in a dry, subtropical area, and a terrible idea if you're in some cloudy northern coastal city.

[Anonymous No.450950]

>>448474
>earthship
>practical and/or cost efficient

[Anonymous No.450951]

aint nothin sustainable or green about burning wood

[Anonymous No.450952]

>>450951
>nothing sustainable or green about utilizing a renewable resource

[Anonymous No.451033]

>>450951
>>450952
It isn't green, that is for sure. At least normal wood burning isn't. It is sustainable though. Just replant. Also, to be truly sustainable, you can't be planting regular trees. You'd need to plant faster growing trees.

[Anonymous No.451036]

>>450936
>You now realize that while reducing the energy consumption of the house, you're also increasing your reliance on energy-intensive made parts, some of which can consume more energy during production than they'll ever safe you during their lifecycle.

But that requires thinking ahead.

All they want to do is feel good in the short term.

Explaining mechanical processes to hippies is like explaining freedom of speech to a european.

[Anonymous No.451038]

>>450866
Those things are horrifically inefficient though. The burn far too cool and as a result the fumes are really dirty when compared to hotter burning wood system. Many places have instated ordinances about the emissions from those units. Of course lobbyist for the boiler companies are going apeshit about it and trying to present their own results from their own studies saying they are cleaner than everything else; which they aren't. They are in no way at all, "clean burning".

You're better off using a rocket stove or a Phillips fan stove since they are much cleaner burning than the gassification systems those Central Boiler outdoor wood stoves use.

[Anonymous No.451044]

>>450936
Solar panels are currently not good anywhere. They are too inefficient, require too much to make, cost too much up front, and don't last long enough.

They are currently a pipe dream. Like a environmentalist's mortgage. Sure, it gives them what they want right now, but they never break even in any way.

More efficient electronic devices, conservation, and passive uses of renewable resources are where it is at.

[Anonymous No.451046]

>>450936
That's why I'd recommend other forms of solar energy, for example, parabolic mirrors heating the glycol mixture, or something. No energy-intensive parts. You'll need a ton of mirror though. If you're interested, you might even make your own turbine out of that.
Even if you use the panel, I'd still use mirrors to concentrate light from a large area to that panel. I think it's a stupid waste of panel to just cover the whole roof.

[Anonymous No.451059]

>>451046
There are hybrid solar panels that have tubes on their backs to heat liquids that are pumped through them. It helps keep them cooler, last longer, and you get hot water from it.

[Anonymous No.451069]

>>450632
>They are fucking Terrible, you mean.
What's wrong with them?

[Anonymous No.451074]

>>451069
>>450632
>>449892

The Earthship architecture is really cool and inspiring. I'm just thinking, how does that work in a colder climate? The glass bottle walls must have real bad thermal insulation, and the ground is also very cold in winter.

[Anonymous No.451076]

>>451074
They said something about the dirt around the tires storing heat, but I'm not sure. I just know that it rains a lot where I live and I sure as hell don't want my house melting around me.

Also, in any video about it I've watched they completely ignore putting in any DPM under the building. My guess is this is so they can plant things inside the house and the roots can still get water from under the house, and so the roots don't hit the DPM or something. Still, lets hope you're not in an area with lots of radon. Probably an non-issue and your last concern when living in a house like this though.

[Anonymous No.451079]

>>451074
You still use insulation. The dirt and everything else is for thermal mass so temperatures change very slowly. The glass bottles are strictly for decoration and nothing else at all. Even if they say the bottles are for anything else, they are actually incorrect.

>>451076
Most of those places are incorrectly built anyway.

[Anonymous No.451082]

>>451079
Where do you put the insulation?

[Anonymous No.451090]

>>451082

[Anonymous No.451091]

>>451090
Ah, I see. Yeah most of the ones I saw were made totally wrong then.

[Anonymous No.451094]

>>448140

>>451076
>>451079
>>451082

According to The $50 And Up Underground House Book by Mike Oehler, which is a really good book that maybe you should read,
there are several benefits from dirt floor. It's really good for your feet for one. Also it claims it stores heat well - but it also takes a lot of energy to warm, so I don't know, maybe in the case of underground house this is true.
Also easier maintenance if you need to access pipes or something under the floor - just dig a bit, instead of pulling off some planks or crawling in some tiny space under the floor.
Of course there's a carpet or some kind of cover, you don't have your feet in mud in your home.
Dirt insulation is an interesting subject. Myself I live in Finland where the ground water actually freezes, so obviously here it's impossible. You'd just need to put so much energy in the ground.

[Anonymous No.451096]

>>451094
>$50 And Up Underground House Book
Oh yes, will download

I'm not sure dirt floors would be suitable for where I live (Ireland) either. I don't think our soil would ever get that solid, no matter how dry and compacted. Then again I've never tried. I'd love to buy some land and start building, then figure out what works here and what doesn't.

Not sure if you'd even need planning permission for something not connected to any mains and made out of dirt, and I sure as hell hope not since there's no way you'd get it.

[Anonymous No.451098]

>>451096
But you can make it invisible! Nobody will know it's there.

[Anonymous No.451100]

>>451098
That's true. I wasn't really thinking underground until now. Sounds really cool, like a Vault from Fallout.

[Anonymous No.451116]

>>451100
>>451096

Although the underground houses depicted in the book are much unlike vaults, they have lots of window area and greenhouses and stuff, which is pretty visible and not dungeon-like.

[Anonymous No.451122]

>>451116
I realize that now, since I'm about half way through chapter two. The author seems like a really cool guy.

[Anonymous No.451301]

>>448140
Well... i would just over produce electricity and sell it to the electrical company then use a bit of that when you cook etc
Don't know if they would agree to do that.

[Anonymous No.451331]

>>448140
Harness your poop for methane.

Make a gas valve for your septic tank.

(I seriously hope you're not flushing your valuable nutrient poop down the city sewer system)

[Anonymous No.451663]

http://www.hydrogenhouseproject.org/the-hydrogen-house.html
ill just put this here

[Anonymous No.451664]

if your in the usa get one of these solar ovens for you backyard


http://www.truckcitycbgps.com/