The Power to Destroy Utility Bills


Working on this term paper I find myself researching a lot of different topics trying to come up with ideas.  One topic that I stumbled upon was zero energy buildings.  So what’s special about this topic?  Absolutely nothing, except the fact that this could possibly destroy the need for all utility companies.  How is something like this even possible?  Well, let me explain.  These net zero buildings consume no energy and carbon emissions.

house net zero

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been conducting researching using these net zero buildings to make this a reality.  They built a facility in Gaithersburg, MD that “produces as much or more energy than it uses thanks to a litany of high-tech features such as solar panels, cutting-edge heating and cooling systems, and a virtually airtight construction,” (Handley).  They predict that the building will produce about 15 to 20 percent more energy than it will consume annually.

So the question is, why are these building not being mass produced since they would be a great asset.  Really the only issue is the production cost.  Average houses are estimated to cost 600,000 dollars or more.  That seems pretty steep but, aren’t we already paying that with the cost of utilities?



  1. ohxxx100

    It is pretty awesome to imagine a house generating all the powers for living. There are some negative thoughts on your idea because it costs a lot and to be a break-even for the construction cost, it will take very long time. However, I believe it is a great idea and good start for developing a method that creates 0 energy consuming with 0 gas emission that would slow down the global warming and inherit a clean planet to the future generation. I believe there are various technologies to make a 0 energy consuming house such as using solar panel, passive solar design, air ventilation, underground, and etc. Further more, not only applying these technologies, it might be helpful for your paper to add some new building materials that helps generation energy.

  2. nguy1621

    This is a very cool concept and I look forward to reading your paper. I find this pretty interesting in that this could have been accomplished very early on.
    I believe the reason as to why this is not a current feasible option for the common man is purely economic. It is not only that it will cost upwards of $600,000, but the true economic cost of jobs lost, utility companies lost, and the negative outcomes of GDP from all the revenue lost on both aspects. If you were to consider the thousands of people that utility companies employ and how much revenue in the form of spending and taxes they generate, then one might begin to understand the “problem” greener homes might cause. You would also have to take the consideration of unemployment benefits being handed out versus what is already a negative return from all that was already lost. Don’t even get me started on the lobbyists who have been fighting these kinds of advancements since their inception.
    There is only so long something of this importance can be delayed before the general public demands for it. Until demand for these kinds of homes is greater in terms of both price and environmental benefits, there will be little to no movement along this kind of frontier. I am sure you will come through this in your research of this topic and I am very intrigued and looking forward to reading it.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: