The Tweakonomist Philosophy …

Posted by in Basic Tweakonomics on May 20th, 2011 | 0 comments
The Tweakonomist Philosophy …
Investment of any kind (even in renewable energy equipment, or more efficient HVAC equipment) represents both an opportunity cost versus other social investments that might be a better use of the same money, and a significant carbon footprint.  It might take many years to save the carbon invested in a single piece of new equipment. If we can avoid that investment by eliminating the demand for it, we should.
  • In looking for these radically low-cost investments, we follow a deliberately exploratory and sometimes experimental process.
What if we can find interventions that can pay back in less than a month?  What if we can open a door, move a thermostat, paint a wall, slap a few feet of foam board on a cold spot?  What if, by working within these large diverse facilities with outdated equipment and poorly maintained HVAC systems, we discover some new ways to live within our inhabited spaces which are more broadly applicable and could change the way we design and build new spaces?
  • The Passive House movement is an example of design thinking that doesn’t assume that a building needs expensive and complex equipment to be efficient.
But even Passive House could be improved by continuing to push towards less expensive and more flexible ways to accomplish the same goals.  For example …
  • Is ultra-insulation the most cost-effective strategy?  Is there a way to design airflow or use thermal mass to balance inputs and reduce the level of insulation needed?
  • Can we put together off-the-shelf components (mass-produced for a larger market) to reduce materials costs?
  • Can we reduce labor in installation?
  • Can we simplify and “de-professionalize” any of the processes, so they can be performed by unskilled labor?
The ultimate goal is to achieve significant costs savings, equivalent to the more aggressive design strategies (geothermal heat pumps, Passive House) at no incremental cost over conventional building and HVAC systems.  If possible, this has a number of important benefits:
  • The new practices have a  better chance of spreading virally by not requiring special subsidies, investment, or expertise.
  • The savings are available immediately to the individual, family, organization, or society without being tied to paying off the investment.
  • The carbon footprint of the installation itself is likely to be less.
It would be perfectly reasonable to doubt that “no incremental cost” is feasible.  But we should keep in mind that it’s a very desirable objective, from an economic and environmental point of view, and keep working towards it as creatively as possible.
    

    Leave a Reply