Net-zero systems that promote sustainability; net-positive is encouraged.
(All of the proposed criteria sound good/useful to me, but here’s a comment in favour of this aspect…)
Energy consumption is likely to be significant, therefore energy efficiency is a worthwhile criteria. Clean sustainable systems and renewable energy make a lot of sense here.
I would like an understanding of why we have not been more focused collectively on net-zero building requirements and retrofitting old buildings to be net zero. 80% of infrastructure is typically existing structures.
Thank you for your comments, @akb and @serinity! I’d also like to invite @CloudWater, @Ianelliott, @bhaskarmv to weigh in, since you contributed to the earlier discussion around water treatment being energy-intensive.
We have drafted 10 potential judging criteria for a Circular Water Economy XPRIZE and are now asking the community to vote for 5 each to find out how we can create the most impactful yet audacious integrated wastewater treatment system.
If you think energy efficiency should be one of the 5 judging criteira, please vote this up by clicking on the arrow in the yellow box.
Energy efficiency should always be an evaluation critiria due to the ever-increasing demand for energy.
When you consider energy efficiency, one pillar is the built environment. 70-80% of buildings in the US run very old equipment and need to be recommissioned. We often think of new buildings for energy efficiency, but there is a ton of opportunity to make impact within the existing built environment. With the advent of covid19, it’s also a great time to push for energy efficiency, because indoor air quality is actually quite poor. The sealed recirculated air that we are in is bad for our health. So, through addressing a health issue as a forcing function, you can try to impact energy efficiency. Electric radiant heating and cooling are great ways to improve air quality and energy efficiency, serving both masters: planet, humans.