Posts Tagged ‘energy’

Deciding on exterior doors

Monday, August 30th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Maybe I should take a short break from the windows. How about doors instead? We still have to resolve the exterior door issue for the basement front and back.

Having secure doors that make a break-in difficult is important to us. My research earlier this year led me to a couple of commercial steel door products that would do the job and somewhat met our energy requirements. The problem was the price tag. Around $1,500 for a steel skin door with foam filled core and thermally broken steel door frame. Ouch!

We had the time to step back from the whole issue, rethink and wait for the lucky coincidence that may spark a new idea.

The new idea was triggered when we were looking at storm doors. We ran into a category called security storm doors.

Rather than spending $1,500 on a heavy duty commercial door that has no NFRC rating, we could spend up to $600 on a light duty residential steel door with a security storm door to the outside.

We have no illusion that the residential steel door, typically a gauge 22 or 24, would not offer the security of a commercial door, typically with a gauge 16 or 18. But that security deficit is bridged by the storm door, typically manufactured out of heavier duty steel.

We found an affordable product with a large laminated security glass pane and a three point lock system. I am sure someone could still break in, but only after having gotten the neighbors’ attention.

The security issue appears resolved, the price tag of $600 seems much more reasonable, but what about the energy side?

We had no problem finding an affordable, pre-hung, 22 gauge residential steel door with a foam core, a thermally broken aluminum threshold and U-value of 0.14 (R-value of about 7). The door has the ever-important NFRC rating and as such would qualify for the tax credit and comply with the Chicago Green Homes Program.

Now that we shifted the security performance onto the storm door, I also feel comfortable with the wooden door frame of the pre-hung steel door. That eliminates the worries about a thermally broken steel frame, satisfies our energy expectations and carries a much more reasonable price tag.

Furthermore, if we install the security door relatively airtight and with good weather stripping, we may be able to add another R-1+ to the whole assembly, which gives my energy-ego a big boost.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Highly-Insulating (R-5) Windows and Low-e Storm Windows Volume Purchase Program

Tuesday, July 20th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Here is another incentive that may help us with the replacement window decision. This time it’s not a tax credit but a program by the Department of Energy (DOE) called the “Highly-Insulating (R-5) Windows and Low-e Storm Windows Volume Purchase Program”. I stumbled across it in a GreenBuildingAdvisor blog post.

“The aim of this volume purchase initiative is to work with industry and potential buyers to make highly insulated windows more affordable.”

… states the DOE web site. Hey, great! This is right up my alley. Anything that could make this big investment less hurtful on our pocketbook is welcome!

So, how does this program work? There are 30-plus vendors that qualified for the DOE volume purchasing program – vendors that sell “high performance windows” with U-value of 0.22 or less.

The windows volume purchase web page allows the user to browse through different window types for new construction, retrofit windows, patio doors and low-E storm windows. I can select my window size range (listed in unit inches [UI]) and get access to a list of participating vendors.

This program can be a real big time saver. Rather than going from vendor to vendor to find out if they have high performance windows, I have a preselected list right at my fingertips. The program is also an excellent resource to quickly find local vendors of high performance windows.

I began to call around to see how much savings I could expect from the program. This is where it got interesting. It was officially launched on May 27, 2010 and some participants are organized, others are not.

With some vendors, I communicated with a sales person who was designated to just deal with the DOE program sales, while others had no clue what I was talking about. I literally had to point them to the web site so they could see their name in the participating vendor list. Some had to get in touch with their corporate headquarters to investigate what this was all about.

This made it rather difficult to get my hands on the pricing information. I had to be very explicit and persistent that I was only interested in the DOE volume purchase initiative pricing structure, the same structure that had been submitted to and approved by the DOE.

Despite all the confusion I caused with my inquiries, I eventually got some pricing that appeared to be in line with the DOE program.

Because we are about to replace the basement windows, I used their size range (up to 70 UI) for my inquiry and got a price spread of $138.00 to $328.00.

window-matrix-01

I am not sure, but my gut tells me that some of the prices are not that different from the regular sales prices, which puts into question the objective of “making highly insulated windows more affordable”.

But so what? I still can get a 70 UI high performance window for under $200, right?

Well – you have to look out for the air leakage (AL) rate. Like I contemplated earlier, the insulation value of a window can be negated by a high AL rate. If we would like to keep the AL below 0.05 cfm/sf, we are looking at more than $200.00 per window.

As helpful as the DOE program is, it is important to remember that there are windows that are even more efficient than those included in the program. That is why I kept the Uniframe double hung by Great Lakes Windows in my list.

The question now is if the price delta to the next runner up (the Serious Windows product) can be justified by additional energy savings.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Tax credit folly?

Sunday, July 18th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

We stepped deep into window research, but we still have to make a decision on what windows to use. Because they will be a very big investment, any type of rebates, financial incentives or tax credits will influence this decision.

Federal Tax Credits for Consumer Energy Efficiency

… or, more commonly known as the $1,500 tax credit that expires on December 31, 2010.

The total of $1,500 can be applied across a range of energy efficient upgrades, such as furnaces, water heaters, insulation, doors and – yes – windows. This made us very happy as we were convinced that we could claim the $1,500 in a heartbeat on our new windows … until I looked at the fine print.

Qualifying windows must have a U-value of 0.30 [LINK] and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) of 0.30 (see also ‘The world of windows’ post).

This is a federal tax credit, available nationwide, from Alaska to Florida and Southern California to Maine, intended to stimulate the economy and improve the energy efficiency of existing homes.

Now, wait a minute, how can that energy efficiency thing work with this one requirement (U-value of 0.30 and SHGC of 0.30) across a number of different climate zones? Down south, a very low SHGC is probably of interest while the U-value would not matter that greatly. It would be the reverse up north, where the insulation value (U-value) counts and passive solar heat gain (high SHGC) may actually be desirable.

Take our house in Chicago. I ran a quick window analysis for the 1st and 2nd floor with the RESFEN model. The only variable in the analysis was the SHGC.

  • Scenario 1: SHGC north 0.25, east 0.25, south 0.25, west 0.25
  • Scenario 2: SHGC north 0.51, east 0.51, south 0.51, west 0.25

Allowing for passive solar heat gain (high SHGC) through the windows on the east and south side could bring the annual heating load down as much as 10%, even though our building has a north-south orientation. The more a building has access to passive solar, i.e. lots of windows in the south elevation, the greater the potential to lower the annual heating load.

That said, any window slated for passive solar heat gain (high SHGC) would need proper summer shading or otherwise the winter heating savings may be lost in summer cooling needs.

Even the Energy Star program recognized the importance of the different climate zones and has structured the qualifying criteria for windows, doors and skylights accordingly.

Why the federal tax credit for consumer energy efficiency did not take the same approach is a mystery to me. I guess the intent is good but the execution is poor.

As for the $1,500 – we may not claim it on the windows alone, because we would like to benefit from passive solar heat gain. But we have the boiler, insulation and doors that will help us to claim the full amount.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

The world of windows

Thursday, July 8th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Out of all items I have researched, looking into windows has taken by far the most time. And I am not talking about hours. I have spent days on figuring out what to do.

Why? Windows are a critical component in the energy efficient building envelope we would like to create. The objective is to have the window efficiency somewhat correspond to the R-value of the walls, which would make each investment worthwhile. To get there, we have to look at triple pane windows.

But they are a very big, if not the biggest, investment component in the building shell. Initial prices ranged from $400 to $1,300 for a 100 UI window. I suspected that the $450 must be a “too good to be true” case, while a commitment to the $1,300 window requires a level of obsession that I am lacking.

UI = unit inches (window width + window height = unit inches)

Looking at the energy performance helped me to narrow the field and get products organized. Four performance metrics of the NFRC ratings (National Fenestration Rating Council) help in that process.

U-value

The U-value is an expression of the heat transfer coefficient (or insulation value) and is determined according to the NFRC 100 test.

I initially used a U-value of 0.25 for the energy model, but hope to get it below 0.20, which would correspond to an R-value of 5 or greater. A window with a U-value of 0.20 or less would feel comfortable even during a cold winter day, as long as it is air tight (see also below).

Solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC)

SHGC reflects the heat gain in a space through a window and is determined according to the NFRC 200 test.

Solar gain can be a double sided sword. It could be desired in the wintertime for passive solar heat gain, but not so during summer. We would prefer passive solar heat gain through the east and south windows (SHGC of around 0.5), which we can shade during the summer months to prevent overheating. All westward facing windows should have a low SHGC, such as 0.25 or less.

Visible transmittance (VT)

VT is the amount of visible light that passes through the window and is determined according to the NFRC 200 test.

Some light will be blocked by the window frame and by various glass coatings. We would like to keep the VT at or above 0.4 to allow enough daylight into the building.

Air leakage (AL)

AL is a measure of air infiltration through and around a window (in cubic feet per minute per square foot [cfm/sf]) and is determined according to the AAMA/WDMA/CSA test.

Air infiltration is often overlooked but is rather critical to the window performance. What is the point of having a window with good U-value (say 0.20) if plenty of cold (or hot) air constantly leaks through the window.

The Efficient Window Collaborative recommends windows with an AL of 0.3 cfm/sf or less. That said, I have heard a number of times that 0.3 cfm/sf can feel uncomfortably drafty on a cold winter day. We would prefer an AL less than 0.05 cfm/sf.

See also:

Existing Homes: Selecting Energy Efficient Windows in Illinois

Questions About Replacement Windows & Energy?

Styles and materials

I learned that different styles of windows have different energy performance characteristics, although it really comes down to air leakage.

Double hung windows, the most common style, and sliders typically have a greater air leakage when compared to single hung, casement, awning and picture windows.

Because double hung and slider windows have two operable sections, outside wind pressure may push air in between the two sashes. Casement and awning windows are pressed into the jamb gasket when subjected to outside wind pressure, resulting in an even tighter seal.

Picture windows are non-operable and as such should not have an air leakage issue, unless they have a shoddy frame.

An item that influences the pricing of windows is the frame material. Vinyl is the most common and least expensive, but has an unfavorable environmental footprint and suffers from expansion and contraction with temperature change.

Aluminum frames need a really good thermal break to prevent heat loss or gain. Another option is a wood frame with aluminum cladding on the outside. These are very nice looking windows in my humble opinion.

Composite material frames (mixture of wood and plastics) are another higher end option and are sold as being virtually maintenance free. So are fiberglass frames, which have the reputation to last a long time.

Who sells high efficiency windows?

Good question. There are European models and a number of Canadian manufactures. I searched a lot for more local manufactures, with limited success. I did build a small product list, bit by bit, through recommendations, web searches and the reading of other green blogs.

Triple pane windows with a U-value of 0.20 or less seem a rarity in the U.S. market. The ones I found (U.S and Canada) were available with vinyl or fiberglass frames.

Return on investment (ROI)

I needed help to put the price of a window into the context of its energy efficiency and probable energy savings. The Efficient Window Collaborative has a very helpful web site that explains the basics and provides a window selection tool.

http://www.efficientwindows.org/selection.cfm

I found additional help in a simple to use energy model called RESFEN. It allowed me to input the performance metrics of the windows around the building and calculated the estimated energy costs or savings.

I now have accumulated a pretty good knowledge base, have a number of products, have an idea about the potential ROI, but still have to make a decision.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Oops – or, what would I do different…

Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

… next time?

We went through all the various steps leading to our new concrete floor. Now it’s time to wind down (just a little), look back and reflect. Reflect on what went well and what I would do differently the next time. Here are our lessons learned:

Use bigger zip ties

I purchased 4 inch zip ties to tie the pex tubing to the welded wire mesh. The 4 inch zip ties were the right size, but not the right strength.

When we poured the concrete floor and dragged the heavy concrete pump hose across the floor, the 4 inch zip ties popped left and right and went flying.

concrete-pump-03

I had to rush in and re-attach the pex with the much sturdier 8 inch zip ties. They are somewhat oversized, but deliver the strength that was needed.

zip-ties

Clean edges

The top of the bond break was meant as a guide for the finished floor elevation. While installing the vapor barrier, we extended the polyethylene sheathing above the bond break, folded it over and tagged it down. The idea was that we cut the excess off after the pour.

bond-breaks-01

The problem was that we now had obscured the clean and crisp edge of the bond breaks with layers of the vapor barrier. That made it difficult to get a real nice and clean finish along the edges.

Compacting

Not that this is critical, but next time I would rent again a small concrete vibrator. Same as we have used for the spread footings.

I would go around all edges and into all corners to make sure that the concrete fills into all nooks and crevices. Just pushing the concrete against the edge and into the corners didn’t quite fill all the gaps.

bond-breaks-02

How to move around

We have a basement front door, which was boarded up, and a basement back door through which we moved in and out during the pour.

We started with pour from the front towards the back. Once we were done with the pour we needed to get back to the front for the troweling process, but didn’t want to step through the fresh concrete in the back.

If I would have thought about opening the basement front door, we would not have had anything to worry about.

Duh – think!

Yep, this is where I hit the off switch on my brain and it really bothers me! What is wrong in the picture below?

sewer-01

I went to great length to insulate the basement floor and paid great attention to the thermal break issue – just not great enough.

Now I have my cast iron sewer work sticking out of the floor and in direct contact with the concrete. Iron is a pretty good thermal conductor and has the potential to zap quite a little bit of heat our of the radiant floor slab. I should have placed a bond break around all sewer work that penetrates the floor.

This would be a none-issue if the City of Chicago would allow the use of PVC Schedule 40 or HDPE piping for underground sewers. These two materials are not be best thermal conductors and would not represent such a big energy drain.

I am seriously considering going back and add the thermal break now, although it would have been so much easier before we poured the concrete!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Turning up the heat

Friday, June 11th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Well, not quite yet, but we are getting ready for it. I am talking about the hydronic heating system in the basement floor, also known as radiant floor heat.

The material

To get to the radiant floor heat, we have to install ½ inch cross-linked polyethylene tubing (commonly known as PEX tubing) that will be encapsulated in the basement concrete floor.

The material properties of PEX tubing make it ideal for radiant floor heating systems. It also begins to replace copper tubing in domestic plumbing systems, local building codes permitting.

PEX has an incredible resilience, with two exceptions. First, it degrades under the exposure of UV light. Most product information advises to keep the exposure of the tubing to daylight to less than 90 days. It is needless to say that the less it is exposed to any light, the better.

Secondly, it degrades on the exposure of radical oxygen molecules, which are occasionally found in water. Because of that it is recommended to use PEX tubing for hydronic heating systems with an oxygen barrier.

We would like the tubing to last as long as the concrete floor!

The installation

The radiant floor heat in the basement is organized into several zones. Each zone serves different heating or temperature needs.

pex-01

All the tubing originates in the utility room, where will have the hot water source for heating, and returns to the utility room. Eventually we will connect the ends to a manifold.

The first two lines along the floor edges are spaced 6 inches apart, delivering extra heat along the foundation walls, which mitigates their potential cooling power. All other lines are then spaced 12 inches on center. The spacing is easy as we can use the six by six inch grid of the welded wire mesh as a guide.

We attached the tubing to the welded wire mesh with four inch zip ties at the recommended spacing of every two feet.


To control cracks in the concrete floor, we have planned expansion joints at various locations. At these locations, we run the PEX tubing through a PVC sleeve. The sleeve is the sacrificial lamb, protecting the PEX tubing from stresses caused by any cracking.

pex-02

It is also recommended to protect the PEX tubing with PVC sleeves wherever it transitions in or out of the thermal mass, i.e. the concrete floor.

pex-03

This is the case in the utility room where the lines originate and terminate (see image above) and where the lines transition out of the main basement into the porch area (see image below).

pex-04

The pressure test

Very good! The PEX tubing is in place. Tomorrow, there will be a bunch of guys running around with equipment pouring the concrete over the tubing. But what if we damage a line and cause a leak during the concrete pour?

If that happens, we want to know about it right away, not after the concrete has cured!

Solution: connect all loops with compression fittings, set a pressure gauge on the last line, put the system under pressure and monitor the pressure during the floor installation.

pex-05 pex-06

Done! I got the bicycle pump out, put 30 psi on the system, and we are ready for the concrete the next morning. Except – when I showed up, two hours before the concrete arrived, the pressure had dropped to 10 psi. I wasn’t sure what to make of it and call Mariusz, our plumber, in a panic.

He pointed out that it is very unlikely that I have a leak in the PEX tubing and recommended that I check the compression fittings for a leak.

Our neighbor, who was up early, supplied me with soapy water in a spray bottle. Before long I got a big soap bubble around the culprit fitting and had it fixed. I pumped the pressure back up to 20 psi, and this time it was holding for good.

Actually, after the concrete pour, the pressure rose to 22 psi due to the heat in the concrete from the curing process. Let’s call that airtight!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Spread footing detail

Saturday, May 8th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

On the road to the new basement floor, I have to put some thought into the spread footings. How do they fit into the rest of the basement floor assembly?

Let’s start with the energy side of things. It is important to keep the spread footing below the basement floor insulation to minimize the horizontal thermal bridging. Another one inch of insulation around the footing pedestal reduces the vertical thermal bridging, and at the same time acts as an expansion joint.

spread-footing-01

For proper moisture management, we include a vapor barrier between the insulation and concrete floor, which we turn up vertical at the footing pedestal. To prevent moisture from traveling up into the pedestal, it is placed on a damp-proof layer , separating it from the spread footing.

This allows for a straightforward installation sequence. I can pour the spread footing first, followed by the installation of the aggregate base, insulation and vapor barriers. The pedestal is then poured along with the new concrete floor.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Shocked – almost literally

Tuesday, April 6th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Cathy started to salvage the trim and baseboards on the second floor while I am still pottering around in the basement.

She suddenly pays me a visit, looking for the electrical current tester. She thinks she has found a hot wire while hammering away at a conduit that was in front of a baseboard. I laughed at her because I had all wires disconnected from the electrical panels last year. We only have a temporary outlet in the basement and on the first floor, but nothing connected to the second floor.

She went back upstairs, put the ends of two wires in question together and got a big old firework. I wasn’t laughing anymore but was grateful that she was still alive.

hot-wire-01

So what is going on? I checked the panels in the basement and again, nothing is feeding the second floor – nothing! Back upstairs, we follow the conduit through the house, leading us to a junction box in the back porch.

hot-wire-02

We checked and the wires were hot indeed. I disconnected them right away, but still had to trace them to the outside to find the source of the current.

My jaw dropped once I realized that the wires were directly connected to the incoming 200 amp service. No circuit breaker, no nothing! I was shocked (no pun intended) and then hopping mad. Not only could someone have gotten electrocuted, but this was also a serious fire hazard!

hot-wire-03

The previous owner of the building claimed to be a licensed electrician. All I wanted to know is what may have possessed him to install something this reckless, if he was indeed responsible for this?
Cathy pointed out that the wiring fed an outlet directly under the bedroom window.

hot-wire-04

They must have used the outlet for a big old air conditioner window unit. Because they suck a lot of electricity, the outlet was directly connected to the incoming 200 amp service, bypassing the electrical meter. This way no one had to pay the electricity bill for air conditioning – but someone could have gotten killed.

I am still hopping mad!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

What pipe material to use?

Thursday, February 25th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Let’s keep the momentum. Let’s rant some more about green stuff.

The old sewer clay tiles need replacing; that decision has been made. But what material should the new sewer be made of?

This decision is made for us, and the answer is given in the Chicago plumbing code. All concealed (i.e. buried) sanitary sewers within a building must be cast iron soil pipe (CISP).

Iron? For waste water? In soil? Wow – wait a minute. This doesn’t make sense! Isn’t iron subject to corrosion? It may rust from the inside and outside. We are using low flow and low flush systems, which reduces the dilution of any acid based liquids (such as urine) and increases the probability of corrosion within a cast iron sewer pipe.

We will use a high efficiency condensing boiler. The condensate from such a boiler is known to be corrosive and further increases the probability of corrosion within a CISP. What about the longevity of this thing? Once I am done replacing it, I never want to touch it again, even if I get to be a 100 years old!

CISP Institute information proceeds to inform me that cast iron pipe are highly durable and probably the best material to use. Well, this is sort of expected. But I still have a hard time believing that CISP is as corrosion resistant as HDPE (high density polyethylene) or PVC (polyvinyl chloride) piping. Resistance of HDPE pipes is rated from pH 1.5 to pH 14, according to a sales representative. So maybe I need to take this with a grain of salt too!

Because HDPE or PVC pipes have good corrosion resistance, they also maintain good flow and slide characteristics, which in turn reduce maintenance or blockage compared to CISP’s.

And there is the carbon footprint issue. Wouldn’t you expect cast iron to have a much larger carbon footprint compared to HDPE or PVC? Time to find out.

The International Centre for the Environment (ICE) at the University of Bath (England) has published the ‘Inventory of Carbon & Energy’ for various building materials. I found data for all three materials (cast HDPE, PVC and iron) and was able to calculate the following carbon footprint per linear foot of a 4 inch sewer:

pipe-carbon-foot-print

Even though the cast iron sewer has the biggest carbon footprint, the CISP Institute points to the recycled content of the product and labels it green (see page 131 of the CISP and Fittings Handbook).

PVC is a distant second, but is no angel. The production of polyvinyl chloride has all sorts of environmental issues associated with it. PVC piping (such as Schedule 40) is very popular though because of its low cost and ease of installation.

HDPE appears to have the lowest carbon footprint out of the three materials. It seems to have a better reputation than PVC with regard to environmental issues and is recyclable. It is more difficult to install compared to PVC and requires fusion or welding equipment for moist pipe joints.

Thinking this all through, and assuming that I have my facts straight, I really would like to use HDPE piping for the sewer replacement.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

The big sewer question

Sunday, February 21st, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

If we ever want to turn the basement into a third unit, flood protection will be rather important. We have inherited a check valve protection, but I am not too sure if this is the best option.

What else can we do?

Option #1

We could create a vertical separation between the waste water system for the basement and the rest of the building. In other words, the 1st and 2nd floor waste water system is gravity fed, while the basement system is pumped. Here is how it would work:

sewer-option-01

We eliminate the check valve with the sump and have the main sewer run directly to the vertical stack that service the first and second floor. All the basement waste water is plumbed into an ejector pit with a sump, which pumps all waste up to the first floor level and over into the vertical sewer stack.

If the city sewer system backs up into the house, all flood and waste water will be contained in the main sewer pipe. There is no plumbing connection that would allow the goodness to spill into the basement.

Option #2

We could keep and repair the check valve system. The check valve prevents the city system from backing up into the basement. It would be placed in an ejector pit with a sump and a sewer overflow. The waste water for the entire building is thus gravity fed…

sewer-option-02

… with one small exception, and that is if city system floods and the check valve closes. Once this happens, the pump engages and all waste water from the house is pumped out of the building.

Pros and Cons

Option #1 (see sketch above) would give us the flood protection we seek. The bathrooms and kitchens on the 1st and 2nd floor are gravity fed and would always remain operable. Not so for the basement plumbing, where use would be restricted during any power outage, which would disable the sump for the basement waste water system.

Option #2 (see sketch above) also gives us the necessary flood protection and is highly efficient as all waste water is gravity fed. A power outage in this case would only affect us during flooding, disabling the sump when the check valve is closed.

Should this ever happen, we still would be in good shape because we plan to use low-flow fixtures throughout the house. I calculated that we could store about 30 to 40 gallons of waste water in the 4 inch main sewer line, before it would spill out the basement floor drains. With 1.1 gallons-per-flush toilets, we could use the bathroom up to 25 times.

This logic of storing waste water in the sewer line will only work if I am disconnecting the downspouts from the sewer, which the city won’t allow. If I keep the existing roof downspout connected, the roof runoff would certainly flood the basement – if the power is out.

Option #1, on the other hand, would avoid this problem altogether, as all roof runoff and waste water is contained in the main sewer line and nothing can spill into the basement.

I also have to look at the energy side of things, if I would like to keep the ultimate goal of a zero energy building alive. The beauty of Option #2 is that a law of physics does the work for us. The system runs on gravity. The sump at the check valve may only have to kick in once it floods, say once or twice a year if that.

Not so with Option #1, where the sump in the ejector pit will kick in each time a plumbing fixture in the basement is used. This, over the course of a year, could result in major kilowatt usage and would not help with lowering our energy consumption.

This is quite a pickle, isn’t it? If you have a good idea or the solution, please let us know!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark