General Electric Plans Net-Zero Energy Home by 2015

July 16, 2009 by Lisa Zyga

Enlarge

The major components of a net-zero energy home as part of GE's Net-Zero Energy Home project.
Credit: General Electric.

(PhysOrg.com) -- Using solar panels, wind turbines, appliance monitoring, and on-site energy storage, General Electric has a plan to enable homeowners to cut their annual energy consumption (from the electric grid) to zero, in some cases, and at least minimize consumption in others. GE is piloting the technology this year, and hopes to commercialize the system by 2015.

The GE Net-Zero Home Project encompasses a variety of technologies, as well as consumer incentives. The most expensive part of the project involves on-site power generation through solar panels or wind turbines, where applicable. As GE executives explained during a recent symposium at the company's Global Research Center in Niskayuna, New York, a 3,000-watt solar panel array could be enough to supply all of a home's consumption, and cost about $30,000 to install.

GE is also converting its appliances (for about $10 per appliance) to be able to communicate with a home's smart meter, allowing consumers to find out how much energy individual appliances use. The information will hopefully allow users to control appliances by using them during off-peak times (peak times are usually morning and early evening), encouraged by time-of-use pricing plans.

Homeowners would also use an energy monitoring device called Home Energy Manager, which costs about $200-250. The Home Energy Manager is designed to control and optimize on-site energy generation and consumption, such as by running the dishwasher or clothes dryer at times when the solar panels are operating, and not during peak times.

As part of the project, plug-in electric vehicles would be charged during the night. The vehicles and other storage batteries could also be used to store electricity for use during peak times.

Overall, a net-zero energy home would cost about 10 percent more than the conventional kind, but would help homeowners save money in the long run, as well as make the electricity grid more efficient. If the system is easy to use and offers financial incentives for customers, GE hopes that it can encourage involvement where everyone can benefit.

via: CNet

© 2009 PhysOrg.com

• Shootist - Jul 16, 2009
  • Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
  GE plans on stealing your money in the cap and tax scam being pushed by the Socialist in Chief of the United States.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Velanarris - Jul 16, 2009
  • Rank: 3.5 / 5 (2)
  I'm interested to see what the final cost of this housing is.
  
  If it's efficient and costs a million dollars, it's a waste as the majority of people will never live there. If it's more efficient than current homes, and is reasonably priced, (reasonably priced being relative to the cost in the local market after pricing out utilities' costs) then regardless of GE's aim, it's a good thing.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Lord_jag - Jul 16, 2009
  • Rank: not rated yet
  "Overall, a net-zero energy home would cost about 10 percent more than the conventional kind"
  
  Okay, buts whats a "conventional" house cost? Are we talking a 800 sq ft new house like we see being built or a 12000 sq ft mansion. I don't think it scales so easily.
  
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• defunctdiety - Jul 16, 2009
  • Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
  This is a step is such a good direction.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Nerdle - Jul 16, 2009
  • Rank: 3.3 / 5 (3)
  This is an awsome step in the right direction. To Lord Jag, a 10% increase in costs would work for any house, itll cost more to outfit a 12000sq ft mansion then it would to outfit a 800sqft house, so its 10% of the market price of that house.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• idaho - Jul 16, 2009
  • Rank: 2 / 5 (1)
  Living in a place with hydro power and no net metering, in the floor heat, so no set back thermastat,aone size fits all solution is hard to imagine.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• robbor - Jul 17, 2009
  • Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
  right now the Germans are making super insulated homes that do not have furnaces. the solar devices to enable this adds about 10% to the construction cost of the house. it's happening right now and the additional cost is minimal. GE will do it and the cost will be low contrary to the belief of the whiners above.
  
  
  
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• El_Nose - Jul 17, 2009
  • Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
  only 10% more than a conventional home -- YET we know that there is at least a 30k increase to cost due to solar panals. --- Now i wonder if the author realises that most of America DOES NOT live in a 300k home.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Velanarris - Jul 17, 2009
  • Rank: 5 / 5 (1)

  only 10% more than a conventional home -- YET we know that there is at least a 30k increase to cost due to solar panals. --- Now i wonder if the author realises that most of America DOES NOT live in a 300k home.

  
  
  Cost and retail price are two very, very different things.
  
  An increase in the cost without an increase in the retail price simply means a smaller profit margin.
  Then again, I don't trust GE to ignore profit margin to "save the world". Their healthcare division has taught me that much.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5