Canadians want government to meet Kyoto targets

[BubberMiley]

seeing as homes produce more greenhouse emissions than cars, you'll have to give up your home.

Or come up with an alternative way to heat it--like, say, geothermal or hydroelectricity. This change would help fuel our economy too.

[Argus]

seeing as homes produce more greenhouse emissions than cars, you'll have to give up your home.

Or come up with an alternative way to heat it--like, say, geothermal or hydroelectricity. This change would help fuel our economy too.

And how do you arrange to "come up with an alternative way to heat" every house in Canada in the next six years so as to meet our Kyoto goals?

[Argus]

And yet, Layton insists Canada must cuts its emissions by 30% over the next few years in order to meet its Kyoto target. He doesn't say how, of course. Or what it would cost.

And yet, the Conservatives and all their friends in the oil sector and rightwing thinktanks with their so-called "scientists" claim that action under Kyoto (or global warming action in general) will cost us dearly...hurt our economy.

They don't say how, of course.

Gee, given the only way to cut our emissions by a third is to close down half our manufacturing, oil and mining industries I wouldn't think anything more complex would be required.

Wow, I didn't know that was the choice facing us. You've really clarified it there Argus. There must have been some really big brains at work to come up with that estimation. I guess fighting Global Warming would totally destroy our economy and maybe even help the terrorists.

Would we all have to give up our cars too?

You know, here's the thing, if you actually had a single clue as to how to meet our kyoto goals, your reply would have been "Oh no, no. Here's what we'd need to do."

But leftists are big on grand theories but not so good on the nitty gritty of how to carry them out. The truth is you don't have a single idea on how we could slash our emissions by a full third within the next six years but don't have the intellectual honesty to say so.

[jdobbin]

You know, here's the thing, if you actually had a single clue as to how to meet our kyoto goals, your reply would have been "Oh no, no. Here's what we'd need to do."

But leftists are big on grand theories but not so good on the nitty gritty of how to carry them out. The truth is you don't have a single idea on how we could slash our emissions by a full third within the next six years but don't have the intellectual honesty to say so.

What do you think Harper's plan will be? Do you think it is a waste of money?

[watching&waiting]

It would not be a waste of money if it did something to move forward on this. The thought about Geothermal hydro electricity is a very good idea and yes we all know that if we can dig far enough down into the earths crust we will at some point get lots of heat that could be then used thru steam to power our generators and such to then give us very low cost and low emmission electric power. This can be done anywhere as the eraths crust is pretty much the same all over and the thermal factors to be able to find enough heat to do this would all be at nearly the same levels. If we knew of areas where the crust was thinner then all the better. What we would need to know how and do is dig and maintain a large hole several miles deep into the crust of the eart and then we would have goethermal heat in abundance.

Now I must admit the Liberals are best at driving the Canadians into the hole, so maybe they would have ideas as well

[BubberMiley]

Geothermal technology is already there. It costs about $20K to install, including ductwork, etc., and pays for itself by virtually eliminating utility bills.

[Argus]

You know, here's the thing, if you actually had a single clue as to how to meet our kyoto goals, your reply would have been "Oh no, no. Here's what we'd need to do."

But leftists are big on grand theories but not so good on the nitty gritty of how to carry them out. The truth is you don't have a single idea on how we could slash our emissions by a full third within the next six years but don't have the intellectual honesty to say so.

What do you think Harper's plan will be? Do you think it is a waste of money?

Not knowing the first, I couldn't comment as to the second.

[Argus]

Geothermal technology is already there. It costs about $20K to install, including ductwork, etc., and pays for itself by virtually eliminating utility bills.

So the cost would be approximately $200 billion dollars? Do you think this can be done in six years?

And would this (replacing home heating with geothermal technology" have much of an affect on emissions which comes largely from cars, from manufacturing plants, from oil production, etc?

BTW, if it costs just $20k and "virtually eliminates" utility bills, how come tens if not hundreds of thousands of homeowners haven't already converted?

[jdobbin]

BTW, if it costs just $20k and "virtually eliminates" utility bills, how come tens if not hundreds of thousands of homeowners haven't already converted?

The cost of conversion is definitely high. I believe they are now thinking that new neighborhoods can be built this way and the cost savings for those homeowners start immediately because the costs to put in thermal versus gas lines are identical. However, the energy they don't use would still be exported so there probably wouldn't be any emission savings.

A new homeowner would save bundles if the geothermal system was installed on construction. I know I'd love one if it had been part of my house's initial outlay.

[jbg]

seeing as homes produce more greenhouse emissions than cars, you'll have to give up your home.

Or both.

Gee, taking action on Global Warming is just too hard...according to a few highly partisan and mostly rightwing folks. I guess we should just do nothing.

And if, as I believe, the phenomena is cyclical, aren't we better off not tinkering with something needlessly?

[cybercoma]

Geothermal technology is already there. It costs about $20K to install, including ductwork, etc., and pays for itself by virtually eliminating utility bills.

Because of the huge amount of land it takes up, geothermal heating will not work in the city unless huge tracts of land are taken up to heat entire neighbourhoods. Even homes in rural areas that use this technology to their advantage are not finding that the heat is very consistent. I know this for a fact because 1) I know people who install it and 2) I know people that have it.

Here's a link on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_heating

The loops have to be 200' deep, unless you have land long enough to accomodate 200' in length.

Also the article states "if coupled with a traditional natural-gas burning heater, the geothermal loop will dramatically reduce the amount of fuel needed to achieve a comfortable building temperature."

IOW, the geothermal system on it's own probably won't "achieve a comfortable building temperature".

But that's ok, because costs a whole crapload of money to put in and you can feel good pretending you're saving the environment by digging up huge chunks of land.

[Led Boots]

Cybercoma,

I’m currently in the planning stages of building an energy efficient home just south of the Calgary city limits and plan to utilize geothermal for heating/cooling.

The first step in the process was to drill sample holes with the purpose of determining soil quality (ie. compaction and moisture content of the soil). These tests have determined that a field of 8 holes at a depth of about 175 ft will meet my needs. From what I have learned the depth of hole required can range from 150’ to 250’ (vertical layout). I’ve heard of bore holes as shallow as 80ft but have nothing to back it up.

Link

I have chosen to build the exterior walls of my new house using straw bale construction techniques which will result in an “R” rating of around 50. Thermal calculations have determined that I should experience an average temperature of about 18 deg Celsius based on an ambient outdoor temperature range of +35 to -35 deg Celsius without the use of an additional heating/cooling source. This is based on a 2000sq ft home and a 2500sq ft workshop/male hideout.

Straw bale construction

I’m hoping that I don’t experience the same disappointment as your acquaintances, but I guess time will tell.

Another thing that many of us don’t take into consideration when contemplating the environmental aspects of geothermal is the heat transfer liquid required to make such a system work. Most use a combination of water and ethylene glycol. Ethylene glycol is derived from….you guessed it, crude oil.

I wonder what the net environmental impact would really be if every Canadian home were to convert to geothermal heating and cooling?

[cybercoma]

Cybercoma,

I’m currently in the planning stages of building an energy efficient home just south of the Calgary city limits and plan to utilize geothermal for heating/cooling.

The first step in the process was to drill sample holes with the purpose of determining soil quality (ie. compaction and moisture content of the soil). These tests have determined that a field of 8 holes at a depth of about 175 ft will meet my needs. From what I have learned the depth of hole required can range from 150’ to 250’ (vertical layout). I’ve heard of bore holes as shallow as 80ft but have nothing to back it up.

Link

I have chosen to build the exterior walls of my new house using straw bale construction techniques which will result in an “R” rating of around 50. Thermal calculations have determined that I should experience an average temperature of about 18 deg Celsius based on an ambient outdoor temperature range of +35 to -35 deg Celsius without the use of an additional heating/cooling source. This is based on a 2000sq ft home and a 2500sq ft workshop/male hideout.

Straw bale construction

I’m hoping that I don’t experience the same disappointment as your acquaintances, but I guess time will tell.

Another thing that many of us don’t take into consideration when contemplating the environmental aspects of geothermal is the heat transfer liquid required to make such a system work. Most use a combination of water and ethylene glycol. Ethylene glycol is derived from….you guessed it, crude oil.

I wonder what the net environmental impact would really be if every Canadian home were to convert to geothermal heating and cooling?

Don't get me wrong, my friend...

I would install geothermal heating in a home I was building in an instant.

The idea brought up was to convert existing homes to this technology and as you're well aware, this is simply impossible. Not all homes can run 175' depth pipes in the ground, or 175' lengths in the ground. Furthermore, your home has an INSANELY high R-Value at 50 for exterior walls. When building new homes, most builders don't insulate that well and you can forget about getting anywhere near that R-Value if you have an older home.

And, even though your home is way beyond code (as far as insulation goes) you're still only achieving a consistent 18C temperature. That would be close-enough for most people, in the sense that it certainly wouldn't be uncomfortable; however, that's a little lower than the average room temperature of 21C.

I'm not putting down your decision because I would do the same thing for the cost savings down the road. It's just not practical in the application that was suggested by the other poster.

And as far as environmentall friendly goes....how friendly is it if the system sprung a leak? I don't imagine ethylene glycol is the best thing for the environment...even if it isn't horribly toxic like leads and mercury.

Keep in touch and let me know how the system works for you. I'm really interested in them and believe with some time and advances in the technology geothermal will be the norm in most homes.

[cybercoma]

seeing as homes produce more greenhouse emissions than cars, you'll have to give up your home.

Or come up with an alternative way to heat it--like, say, geothermal or hydroelectricity. This change would help fuel our economy too.

Seeing hwo your alternative heating for homes idea is not going to work, do you have anything else you'd like to suggest to improve our greenhouse gas emissions beyond Kyoto targets?

[watching&waiting]

I have had a water source heat pump for my home now going on 15 years, and yes they are an efficient way to heat a home but they still need hydro to work, and unless you can find a way to generate hydro with low or no emmission it still means that you pollute. To be able to run a large generateor with geothermal it is very costly and you need a hole in the earth crust at least 25,000 ft or more to be able to generate heat to run the generators. Iceland is on the northern Atalantic fault and has stable gysers etc and electricity generated there is low emmission and very plentiful, and therefore low cost. What has been said here about 20 k etc is not geothermal by the true sense of the word

[Led Boots]

Don't get me wrong, my friend...

I would install geothermal heating in a home I was building in an instant.

The idea brought up was to convert existing homes to this technology and as you're well aware, this is simply impossible. Not all homes can run 175' depth pipes in the ground, or 175' lengths in the ground. Furthermore, your home has an INSANELY high R-Value at 50 for exterior walls. When building new homes, most builders don't insulate that well and you can forget about getting anywhere near that R-Value if you have an older home.

I don’t see why you couldn’t retro-fit a current home to geothermal. I can dig 3ft down for a fence post why not 200ft down for a geothermal piping system, current drilling technology allows us to drill through any types of geological formations. It’s totally possible but for the reason you cited above, futile.I didn’t even look into it converting my current home in the city because the difference to my wallet, and the environment, would have been minimal at best.

What I originally planned to do was build my house into the side of a hill, but after telling my wife this she informed me of her disdain for living in a cave, cut her hair short and put my wood club up for sale.I just don’t get women sometimes.

And, even though your home is way beyond code (as far as insulation goes) you're still only achieving a consistent 18C temperature. That would be close-enough for most people, in the sense that it certainly wouldn't be uncomfortable; however, that's a little lower than the average room temperature of 21C.

The 18C is a lowball figure, I will also have a passive solar heating system on the south facing walls of my house and shop which will provide additional heat as required.(I built a 1:10 scale model of the passive solar system I intend to use and it exceeded my expectations. Very easy and very cool.)

This brings up another good point

By my own off-the-cuff estimation the total amount of building materials I need to build this house is approximately 25-30% higher than building a conventional home of the same size. Most of this additional material is in the form of PVC plastics used in piping and solar panels.

Canadians that believe in Kyoto should be working toward changing the attitudes of home builders and auto manufacturers in the areas of energy efficiency and new product development. If 25% of the people building new homes today insisted on incorporating some aspects of geothermal or solar heating/cooling/power generation systems I’m sure home builders would respond by coming up with innovative solutions to meet their customers needs.

The poll that in the OP of this thread proves one thing to me. Canadians want government (arms length) intervention in order to solve environmental problems but are not willing to accept personal responsibility for these problems. As I stated above, it’s the consumers who ultimately control the market. I wonder what the 77% of Canadians polled that want to “meet or exceed” Kyoto targets are willing to do personally. Live in a cave? Wanna buy a wood club?

Keep in touch and let me know how the system works for you. I'm really interested in them and believe with some time and advances in the technology geothermal will be the norm in most homes.

I think it will work out well. I’m building most of it myself so it’s a long term project for sure. When I’m done I’ll have no natural gas bill and be generating around 500Kw hours per month by way of solar and wind generation power systems.

My own reasons for becoming energy “self sufficient” have less to do with the environment than they do with removing myself from the volatility of the energy markets. Plus I want to watch my electric meter run backwards.

I think I can sum my personal feelings on Kyoto up best with a song,

“Nothin’ on the top but a bucket and a mop and an illustrated book about birds. Seen a lot up there but don’t be scared who needs action when you got words.” (The Meat Puppets “Plateau”)

[cybercoma]

I guess that's the end of the thread. All of these brilliant posters and not a single supporter of meeting Kyoto protocols can come up with any reasonable method of doing so. It's easy to beg the government to do these things when you have absolutely no idea how they're going to meet the targets, but put a face to it in terms of unemployment and economic collapse and everyone tucks tail.

[B. Max]

but put a face to it in terms of unemployment and economic collapse and everyone tucks tail.

It's called coming face to face with reality.

[jbg]

I guess that's the end of the thread. All of these brilliant posters and not a single supporter of meeting Kyoto protocols can come up with any reasonable method of doing so. It's easy to beg the government to do these things when you have absolutely no idea how they're going to meet the targets, but put a face to it in terms of unemployment and economic collapse and everyone tucks tail.

The real promoters of Kyoto, Desmairis and Strong, don't worry about unemployment, and maybe not even about economic collapse.