Johnboy wrote on Mar 16, 2008 11:35 PM:I applaud the effort however giving an award to someone who built a huge house seems contradictory. An award like that should go to someone who built and lives in a small house, using a fraction of the resources to build. I retro fitted my 1500 foot house (5 adults) for a fraction of the resources, and use almost half as many solar panels to acheive energy independence, thereby freeing up panels for someone else to use. Yes, producing solar panels uses energy and produces carbon. My hero is a guy who lives off two solar panels off-grid at that. Where is his award? He will never get one because we reward grandiose ventures, we need to GET OVER IT.

Guesswho wrote on Mar 16, 2008 11:38 PM:Congratulations to you both. You both offer so much to your work and personal communities.

Good for him wrote on Mar 17, 2008 1:38 AM:But I wonder if he is aware how much pollution is caused in the manufacturing process of solar panels, not to mention over their lifetime they don't produce more energy then it takes to make one.

To Johnboy wrote on Mar 17, 2008 6:37 AM:There's nothing wrong with recognizing an accomplishment such as this regardless of the size of the project. Granted, my family of 4 don't need 4600 sq ft ... but we would also never make it in 1500. Size needs vary but the size of obtaining energy independence is a win-win for all!

Kathleen wrote on Mar 17, 2008 6:53 AM:In response to the first comment on the energy used to produce the solar panels in the first place. That is very interesting but just where and how did you come up with that information? I have a system consisting of 48 165 watt panels that was installed in 2001 when we were being raped on electric bills. My system powers 3 refrigerators, 1 deep freezer, a spa, 2 computers, all my lighting, central A/C, microwave and a well pump that supplies water to two homes and I still produce more power than I use in a year. My panels are guaranteed for 25 years. So, if what you say is true that it takes more energy to produce one panel than the panel produces, they must take a helluva lot of energy to produce. I believe the key to appreciating solar energy is that it keeps producing power over many years with little to no maintenance. The sad part of "over producing" is that SDG&E does not pay the producer for their power even though they are supposed to use a certain amount of "green energy". Solar is a great way to go and I am glad I invested in it and am doing my part to be kind to the Earth.

Robert24 wrote on Mar 17, 2008 7:16 AM:I agree with Kathleen; the PV system does way more for the environment than not having one and relying on SDG&E (or whoever your energy supplier is) for your power. Silly comments like the one "Good for Him" wrote only prove how far we still need to go to educate people on alternative energy sources. I doubt that "Good for Him" has any facts to back up his statement, and having renewable energy (like solar) is a much better avenue than getting out power from fossil fuels or other means that create issues in the production of power. Great article!

Resident wrote on Mar 17, 2008 7:30 AM:Less electricy bought the less oil used. The less oil used, the less the need to send our kids to Iraq and get killed. Bravo to all similar efforts. Booooo to those who are driving SUV and Hummers.

real enviromentalist wrote on Mar 17, 2008 7:32 AM:Al Gore is the poster child for enviromentalism, he lives in 15,000 sq. ft. 20 room, eight bathroom home that used $30,000 in gas and electricicty in 2006. Of course he does buy carbon credits (what a joke that scam is)

We are all not going to live in a 330 sq. ft. Yurt with a composting pile out back.

great article

Kathleen wrote on Mar 17, 2008 8:04 AM:Thank you Robert 24. I wish to add to my comments on solar production that we (the working people in the US) could add another avenue in the job market by producing solar panels and the related components. Unfortunately many of our panles are produced outside the US. But if properly handled (marketed, advertised and encouraged with incentives), the field of solar installation could become a very large part of the construction industry and manufacturing industry. Going solar could put a lot of US citizens to work doing something we ALL can benefit from.

The Way To Go wrote on Mar 17, 2008 8:49 AM:Solar is really the way to go, and as technologies continue to improve, the prices will continue to come down and the efficiency will continue to rise. I can see a day when a neighborhood will be it's own power company, sharing the energy created, and selling any access on the open market. Just this one change alone would change the course of history by reducing the amount of oil we need to use while allowing us to maintain the quality of life that we currently have.

Jim in Oceanside wrote on Mar 17, 2008 9:00 AM:Bravo Zulu to Peter and Johnboy, you both are doing something about the problem. I agree with Kathleen about the negativism and greed of SDG&E regarding payment for power from "Green" sources. ...

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 17, 2008 9:14 AM:Kathleen and Robert 24 have it right. Especially the part about creating jobs. We desperately need to re-create our manufacturing / technology sectors of the economy. This is a win / win avenue.

Nick wrote on Mar 17, 2008 9:42 AM:I'm curious where the blogger found figures for how much CO2 was emitted to produce solar panels. As a Contractor, I have been building "Green" for quite some time. There are many factors to a "Green" house besides just solar. For instance, the 3 biggest producers of CO2 in the building industry are Concrete, Steel and Drywall, in that order. Drywall is very important and there are new products on the market. Paperless drywall is one that uses no paper(which is what mold feeds on), by using this product mold will not grow on drywall. A new product soon to be out is called Ecorock, which uses a chemical process and produces 0 CO2, that's right, no green house gasses. If you think you are being environmentally friendly by using a renewable resource like bamboo for your flooring, that might not be as green as you think if it was shipped from Asia on a container ship. Like I said, there are many aspects to building "Green", solar is just one piece of the puzzle. I usrge everyone to do their research and seek out Contractors knowledgeable on "Green" building. Good luck to all.
Cheers, Nick.

Consider wrote on Mar 17, 2008 9:49 AM:Consider that it will take over 25 years for Mr. Norby to pay off the adjustments he's made. I'll include the $11,000 credit he received, since its coming out of all our pockets. All this fuss for him to get his name in the paper. Ya, its great and all, but an unbelievebly expensive system that the majority of people cannot afford. Wow, that's a feel good story. I'm glad my taxes are raised and the state is going bankrupt so a rich guy on the beach can save 11 grand.

Ya gotta be kidding wrote on Mar 17, 2008 10:26 AM:I'm sure glad Norby got those solar panels installed so he can survive the brutal Carlsbad winters!

Janet wrote on Mar 17, 2008 10:28 AM:I applaud that people who are making a effort. Yet, as with everything, this is a mixed bag. Solar will eventually be better and isn't now mostly because our government subsidizes oil and coal at much higher rates than energy efficient power. Solar panels take a lot of energy to produce and leave massive pollution. It is always going to be worse to have a huge house. Interesting how times have changed. I grew up in a family with 5 kids in a 1200 sq. ft. house and we never felt crowded. Of course, we didn't have so much stuff. Now a family of 4 couldn't survive in 1500? Heck, the previous generation from me raised 9 kids in that 1200 sq. ft. house! But again, good that people are trying and it will eventually lead to change.

Elaine L. wrote on Mar 17, 2008 10:36 AM:Manufacturing photovoltaic cells for use in solar panels requires potentially toxic metals such as lead, mercury and cadmium, and produces carbon dioxide which contributes to global warming. Norby's intent is sound, but he needs to do his homework before tauting the environmental impacts of his "zero energy home."

Consider Consider wrote on Mar 17, 2008 10:48 AM:Hey Consider,

Mr. Norby is an example of where we want to be in the future as far as living "green" is concerned. It will not cost as much once we master the techniques and produce "green" houses more efficiently. "Consider" reading thoroughly before you post your uneducated opinions...

bonsall wrote on Mar 17, 2008 11:02 AM:So it takes more energy to produce a solar panel than benefits derived from it? It also takes more energy to produce a Prius than a Hummer, counting the battery. Ok, let's let's keep buring fossil fuels. Don't count the daily savings, only count production costs, what a joke.

professor wrote on Mar 17, 2008 11:31 AM:Your taxes have been going up for decades to pay for all of the damage to public health and the environment -thanks to out-moded fossil fuel based energy. Reactionary short-sightedness has got us into this problem.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 17, 2008 11:46 AM: The post from "Good for him" (1:38am) repeats the tired old urban legend about requiring more energy to produce solar panels than they generate. If you are going to continue to swallow this nonsense (perhaps, uhm, fueled by those who profit from non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS) then at least provide some credible source for your silliness.
The posted response by "Kathleen" (6:53am) was right on target. We finished installation of 32 panels several months ago (to cover Escondido summer air conditioning), and even through all the rain, clouds and short daylight hours of winter it has produced much more than consumed. And the long, sunny days of summer are coming!

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 17, 2008 11:47 AM: The post from "real environmentalist" (7:32am) shows he is living in the past, or looking for some reason to throw mud at a great environmental advocate.
Late in 2007, as reported in many news outlets including the North County Times, Gore completed major environmental rennovations to his property, including solar power, that now make his property an environmental showcase.
I note that "real..." refers to 2006. Is there any reason he chose not to look at a calendar and see it is now 2008?

Apollo wrote on Mar 17, 2008 12:36 PM: Re: "Carlsbad man builds zero energy house" (article)
Was this the North County Times' way of celebrating GREEN for St. Patrick's Day?

Urban_Myths wrote on Mar 17, 2008 12:48 PM:It is nonsense that solar panels use more energy to make than they produce. They payback the energy in just two years. I hear that occassionally, and I can assure you it is nonsense. Google "energy required to make a solar panel"

Actually, the energy required to make a gallon of gas (1.3 million BTUS) exceeds the energy in the gas (1 million BTUs)

Gee which one has less impact, if you think it is solar you better do your home work before you make grand statements

Re: Johnboy wrote on Mar 17, 2008 1:02 PM:I agree. Although I applaud their energy efficiency, why so big of a house? My mom raised three kids in a 1100 sf home, and we turned out okay (really!) Big, monster homes for two people are part of the problem.
One more thing: we need to go nuclear! Get away from fossil fuels entirely that way.

Karl wrote on Mar 17, 2008 1:32 PM:I don't get folks here complaining about large homes. If the home uses nop energy off the grid what's the dif? I live in 1500 sq ft home on a 5000k lot because it is what I prefer. In the story the landscape is also drought tolerant. these people are to be applauded. I could give a rat's rear if their home was 20,000k sq ft if they live off the grid.

Barry wrote on Mar 17, 2008 2:26 PM:... It doesn't matter if you live in a one-room cabin, or a Gore-style mansion, if you put forth the effort the Norbys have in order to tread more lightly on the planet, everyone benefits.
Do it in your own way, but for God's sake, do it, and don't demean those who choose to do it differently from you, when it is clear they are acting in a positive way.
These type of efforts may be one small step for man, but supporting and helping spread these efforts globaly as we go forward, will undoubtably benefit all mankind.

Kathleen wrote on Mar 17, 2008 2:43 PM:This article has provked a most intersting cross section of opinions. It is too bad that there is so much misinformation and erroeous information concerning the production of solar panels. I am not a solar engineer nor am I an electrician but the electrical contractor that installed my system is very experienced and knowlegable with both solar and grid electricity. He powered his ranch many years with solar. He is well qualified to understand and explain what it takes to produce a solar panel and how long it will take for that panel to pay for itself with production. Production pay back is 1-2 years. As for my system paying for itself, I went from a one month electric bill of $275.00 in 2001 (before the install) to a 1 year (true-up) of $62.39 (after the install). As I said before, I run central A/C, 3 refrigerators, 1 freezer, 1 spa, 2 computers, miscellaneous equipment and a well pump that supplies water to 2 homes...all for $62.00 per year and that is for the right of "storing" my surplus power on the grid. I sent SDG&E an excess of 574 kwh during my net metering period in 2007. I would be happy to compare my electric bill with any of yours. Thank you for all the input.

Alice wrote on Mar 17, 2008 3:15 PM:For those of you criticizing Mr. Norby, I ask, what are you doing to help the environment? Do you use solar hot water, compact flourescent bulbs or LEDS, wind generation, biodiesel, a hybrid car, added insulation, Energy Star appliances, tankless water heaters, low flow toilets and shower heads. Do you use public transsportation or walk to work or the store? I applaud Mr. Norby for taking the action to save energy. Remember, he is powering his car with solar too which saves more energy and creates less pollution. We should thank those that take the initiative to make a difference and for those of you that think solar does not pay for itself, you must still think the world is flat too.

Robert24 wrote on Mar 17, 2008 3:20 PM:To "Consider": So what how long it takes to pay back the expense, at least he is doing something. What are you doing to try and be a part of the solution to our energy dependency? And, unless you are living in a one room hut without a refrigerator or TV, the pay back on this investment is probably closer to 5 to 7 years (sooner if you own a swimming pool). Buying power from SDG&E is not an investment, and you never quit paying!

Stuart wrote on Mar 17, 2008 4:12 PM:Solar cells today pay back in about one year. That also means they pay back 25 times more energy than is used to make them over their lifetime.

The improvements in efficiency will make that better and also will make them cheaper per kilowatt compared to grid power within the next 5 years (they are already cheaper for people who are paying high utility rates).

What you pay to buy Solar PV today is likely to be less than what you would pay for power off the grid over the next 25 years even without improvements because of the inflation rate that the utility companies have to deal with in natural gas costs (they went from roughly $2.00 per unit in 2001 to over $6.00 per unit 2006).

For those that question the energy balance of rooftop pv systems, a better question to ask is how the energy balance of pv produced on your roof compares with the energy produced from natural gas (including the energy used to explore for it, get it out of the ground, transport it, refine it to standards, build generating plants to use it, the cost to clean up the air after its conbusted in generating plants, the costs of building the generating plants, the health cost we all share for breathing the toxic and carenogenic emissions it produces, the tax subsidies we all pay to the oil and gas companies, and the losses after the remotely produced electricity is transmitted over hundreds or thousands of miles of transmission lines).

These are costs that are passed on to all off us.

get greener wrote on Mar 17, 2008 5:06 PM:We need more feel good stories like this to build public knowledge and support on solar homes. Until the technology becomes more widely accepted as feasible and desirable by media attention, it's not going to take off like it needs to.

seth wrote on Mar 17, 2008 7:12 PM:The cost of solar cells will fall by fifty percent in the next eighteen months what with the new manufacturing techniques by nanosolar... which more resemble printing than manufacturing. Then there is work being done with suspensions and polymers that may make solar paint a reality soon.

mlaiuppa wrote on Mar 17, 2008 9:16 PM:I'm envious.

I did install PV last year and hope to zero out my use. And I replaced my water heater with a tankless. I've insulated what I can. No way could I replace my house or build anything custom. But this is certainly the way to go if you can. And when I am able to buy an EV car, I'll put a few more panels on the roof.

Congrats Peter!

windward cottage wrote on Mar 17, 2008 9:43 PM:Our solar system cost less than the prize of a new economy car. And requires zero maintenance.

It's choices wrote on Mar 18, 2008 7:38 AM:A swimming pool cost 70K plus, motorhomes, dessert toys, jet skis, luxury car, kitchen remodle, cruises, I think you get the point.

All of those are available to the average homeowner. Solar and energy efficiant ways of construction are in the same price range and should not be considered a luxury. Out of all the above, it's the only one that really saves a homeowner money.

Greed & Excess wrote on Mar 18, 2008 8:56 AM:Two people in a 4,600 sq. ft. home? I see more greed and excess in this story that I do environmental sensitivity! This is ridiculous!!

Live & Let Live wrote on Mar 18, 2008 9:57 AM:I think it's great that he lives in such a large house, but obviously the space police are alive and well in SoCal. Living in 1500 feet is great too but doesn't make you morally superior so get over it. I would love too create a green, zero power house that's universally designed for the elderly, handicapped, young and strong. Perhaps Peder could put together a symposium for us regular folks to attend and learn how we can do that. Have you ever noticed that when there's a power outage and the electricity completely shuts down there a kind of peaceful hush that you can actually feel physically in your house? It's not just the tv and computer shutting down, you feel less bombarded. Learning to live with less electricity around us may be a very healthy alternative as well as creating a fully powered intense alternate energy house.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 18, 2008 11:22 AM: The post from "Live & Let Live" (9:57am) is right on.
I am tired of those who think the only way to live green is to crawl into a hole and live like cavemen.
While I have gotten used to compact fluorescent lights and now prefer them, it really doesn't matter what kind of bulb you use if it is powered by sunshine.
One can have a nice house and a nice car (seen that Tesla Roadster?), if they are powered by sunshine.
We don't have to choose between doing well and doing good.
In the long run, the best personal choices as well as public policies, promote both.

Greed & Excess wrote on Mar 18, 2008 5:20 PM:I don't begrudge Norby for his oppulent life style. But let's not hold him up as an example of social virtue. If all of us had the same attitude as he, there would be NO space for those who are less fortunate. We have enough problems with homelessness as it is.

CubeMan wrote on Mar 19, 2008 9:27 AM:Damn I am surrounded by Commies! What is with all this "need" talk. They don't "Need" a big car. They don't "need" a big house. "Oppulent life style" is very subjective. I guess someone in power will tell them what they "need" and how to live so we are all "equal". As for the solar panels, they will make up the energy it takes to make them in under 5 years. Great engineering on the house!! Very Impressive. I would have made it bigger.

Greed? wrote on Mar 19, 2008 11:42 AM:I know. I also hate people that make their dreams happen. you are less fortunate because you have no dreams.
Deal with it. He is not your problem.

Windward Cottage wrote on Mar 19, 2008 7:52 PM: It's great to see so much interest in this subject.
We all need to be on a carbon diet? I don't mean to stop consuming just make better choices. solar is a better choice.

Just wondering ... wrote on Mar 20, 2008 7:29 AM:So if Walmart constructed an "energy neutral" store that would be okay, huh? Where does it end, people??

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 20, 2008 9:22 AM: The post from "Just wondering..." (3/20 - 7:29am) asks, "if Walmart constructed an 'energy neutral' store that would be okay, huh?'"
Wal-Mart being environmentally unfriendly is not the only problem with them.
It is also that they have policies that are anti-labor and, in the long-run, hurt consumers and the community.
Try a store that is more friendly to workers and consumers. You don't hear nearly the same animus expressed toward Costco and, yes, I would like to see them convert all their stores to full solar (I understand they are taking steps in that direction, and even Wal-Mart is, so you KNOW it is now economically feasible).

Walmat wart wrote on Mar 20, 2008 9:57 AM:If walmart were energy neutral that would be good. If they reused an existing location tat would be good.

If they located 7 miles out of town with new roads offramps and pad that would require everyone to drive the 7 miles thus wiping out any energy savings by increased use of fuel. That would be very bad.

I believe the norbys reused an old house in an older part of town. Thet is preferable to more sprawl development.

YES! wrote on Mar 20, 2008 12:39 PM:Finally breaking off the power grid and be substainability responsible.! Love and hope to seek many ideas from this house and neighbor. We have hoped to soon have this same type of housing....I wish more people would make these decisions......I am ever so happy to hear when these homes get built....we have to remodel an older home in Oceanside, and hope to go green as much as possible......make that electricity Peter and enjoy zero bills in the summer. Its a great thing you've done!

Windward Cottage wrote on Mar 20, 2008 2:20 PM:I've personally do not shop at Wal-Mart but I know there are people in the Wal-Mart organization that are working on being more sustainable. For them I'm sure it's just about money. If they make small changes in the way they do business it will make a big difference. Just making a decision to buy products that are made in California and do not have to be shipped halfway around the world this seems like a smart choice.

Just wondering ... wrote on Mar 20, 2008 3:21 PM:Reply to Walmart wart: Read the article again. Norby went from a 1,900 sf home to a 4,600 sf. And that "older part of town" happens to be in prime real estate that could be used for a higher public purpose.

And finally ... wrote on Mar 20, 2008 3:34 PM:I believe in capitalism and am happy that Norby has prospered so well. However, it's inappropriate to be holding someone like him up for public accolade given his level of self-indulgence.

Sheila wrote on Apr 6, 2008 6:08 PM:With the current focus on Greenhouse emissions and polar ice melting, this is a good article. However, when I attempted to combine solar and wind generators with battery backup, my traditional lender (a big one in the market) said they would not consolidate my loan unless I was on the traditional power grid - which by the way left me no choice as to have that source of utilities brought into the property cost more than what I had designed for alternative fuel source. If they had allowed the alternate source, three years ago I could have joined to new houses built nearby for a fraction of the cost and installed an inverter. Where I live, there is sunshine a good 80% of the time, and there is wind about 65% of the time. It was a viable solution for the home. Until the big wigs in automotive manufacturing that shot down the electric car, mortgage companies, the petroleum industry, and other muscles in society are forced to support people and products that are green, this whole topic is moot.

Justa Thought wrote on Apr 16, 2008 10:23 AM:Solar panels, yes & why not? Some of the comments whine about the CO2 produced to make the panels, so what. Make an effort to do something about the environment instead of complaining or being an armchair quarterback.

The less dependence we have on the SDGE's & EXXON's of the world, the better. What would the Middle East be like today if we did not use 70% of the fossil fuels? No dead sons & daughters, bankrupt oil companies, healthier air to breathe & oceans to swim in, edible fish etc. Sounds positive to me...

When I was a kid living at the beach in the early 60's I was with a group of friend fooling around as teenagers do. I finished my sandwich and thoughtlessly threw my wrapper on the ground. One of my friends told me to pick it up and put it in the trash can.

I looked at him and looked at the current condition of the beach (loaded with trash) and said with an arrogant scoff "what difference would that make, it would take a miracle to clean up this beach!"

What he said in response I have never forgotten -

"yea, well that miracle begins with you".

Miracles can be quite small but when combined with many others, they create a mighty impact.

Bring your own bags to the grocery store, consolidate automobile trips, use florescent lights and recycle trash.

I don't know much about CO2 emissions but I do know that miracles begin with a mind shift.

Al Gore may live in a mansion and waste resources but don't let that deter you from his message -

JustaThought wrote on Apr 16, 2008 10:27 AM:Solar panels, yes & why not? Some of the comments whine about the CO2 produced to make the panels, so what. Make an effort to do something about the environment instead of complaining or being an armchair quarterback.

The less dependence we have on the SDGE's & EXXON's of the world, the better. What would the Middle East be like today if we did not use 70% of the fossil fuels? No dead sons & daughters, bankrupt oil companies, healthier air to breathe & oceans to swim in, edible fish etc. Sounds positive to me...

When I was a kid living at the beach in the early 60's I was with a group of friend fooling around as teenagers do. I finished my sandwich and thoughtlessly threw my wrapper on the ground. One of my friends told me to pick it up and put it in the trash can.

I looked at him and looked at the current condition of the beach (loaded with trash) and said with an arrogant scoff "what difference would that make, it would take a miracle to clean up this beach!"

What he said in response I have never forgotten -

"yea, well that miracle begins with you".

Miracles can be quite small but when combined with many others, they create a mighty impact.

Bring your own bags to the grocery store, consolidate automobile trips, use florescent lights and recycle trash.

I don't know much about CO2 emissions but I do know that miracles begin with a mind shift.

Al Gore may live in a mansion and waste resources but don't let that deter you from his message -