Comments on: Golf course home could win race to become O.C.’s first super green house

By: William Diepenbrock, Editor

William Diepenbrock, Editor — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:58:28 +0000

The home orientation is a factor here. The window designs and construction basically open the home to the prevailing breeze. Remember, he rebuilt this house from the foundation up, so he could have made any number of adjustments.

By: William Diepenbrock, Editor

William Diepenbrock, Editor — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:56:55 +0000

Not a misprint, but yes, it’s essentially a gray water system, though the description I received suggests its more complex than your basic gray water system.

By: William Diepenbrock, Editor

William Diepenbrock, Editor — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:55:57 +0000

The family doesn’t intend that the home remain home to just the four. They are trying to build a “generational” home that will accommodate other family members over time.

By: sammyj

sammyj — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:55:55 +0000

He didn’t exactly have anything to do with the “Home orientation designed for maximum solar and breeze” since he bought an existing house.

Also edible landscaping is better than native landscaping – non-native can be drought tolerant but edible may save a few trips to the market once in a while.

And agreed, unnecessary square footage is not green. I like the homes in Terramor Village in Ladera Ranch that claim to be “green” yet they have a “tower room.” Last time anybody needed a “tower room” they were keeping a damsel in distress in it.

And I can’t tell if that’s a “green” car in the driveway – as if any car is actually “green.”

By: Darren Moore

Darren Moore — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:59:13 +0000

Is the internal Green Water system a missprint for a grey water system?

By: ttularc

ttularc — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:26:38 +0000

That house could have been twice as green if it were about half the size. Why does a family of 4 need 5000 s.f.?

By: John F

John F — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:58:52 +0000

Old structures are less efficient and use more energy to heat and cool. They also tend to have old appliances that are energy hogs. Water capture is also another issue old structures usually do not account for. Studies show its better to build with quality and design first so you don’t have to keep renovating and updating the home over time. Much less carbon.

By: Jeff M

Jeff M — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:14:35 +0000

Steven makes a good point but one most Amerikans won’t understand or want to understand.

By: Steven Smith

Steven Smith — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:09:31 +0000

The greenest home in orange county is “the oldest home” in orange county. Wherever that is. Living in an older home and replacing things as they break (and only when they break) with the most energy efficient substitutes, creates a model of “Whole Life Efficiency”.

Ripping down & disposing of a whole house & yard and rebuilding with all new materials, regardless of how “green” those materials are, end up being almost impossible to break even “environmentally” in a lifetime. All those new materials need to be harvested, manufactured and delivered. That process always leaves a footprint.

The same is true with cars. The longer you can maintain a car and drive it, the fewer cars go into production. It is production that leaves a big footprint. Example: suppose you drive a 2001 volvo and you think you want to go green. You sell the volvo and buy a Prius. You feel great. But wait! Someone else is now driving your volvo and you are driving the prius. The volvo is still on the road………but wait, it’s a feel-good-prius, this can’t be happening. If you had kept the volvo for another 10 to 15 years, you would have left a much smaller footprint over-all.

Think of these things next time you hear Joe Biden yap it up over new electric plug in Hybrid technology……..oh but remember electricity comes from MAGIC! oh wait….no it comes from Coal, Nuke & Dams……Oooops