Editor’s note: This is part one of the three-part series from Barry Cinnamon on the process and benefits of home electrification. This is also part of a series of articles by members of the ALF-SV Sustainability Affinity Group aimed at providing information and resources on the impacts of a warming planet.
The Big Picture
Sometimes it seems as if the slow-motion global warming crisis is just too daunting to address. But it is not all doom and gloom; there are cost-effective measures we can all take to reduce and reverse global warming. Most importantly, these changes can be made without comprising our 21st-century lifestyles – starting with our homes and cars.
19% of CO2 emissions in the U.S. result directly from fossil fuels used to heat and power our homes and another 22% of CO2 emissions are from our cars and small trucks. We are already well on our way to electrify our cars and trucks, ideally powered by renewable sources of electricity. And many cities are prohibiting the installation of new natural gas heating systems in new residential and commercial buildings.
But the existing 100 million single-family homes in the U.S. are still heated and powered by fossil fuels. By electrifying these homes and using their rooftops to provide the electricity needed for our cars and trucks, we have the potential to reduce U.S. CO2 emissions by 41%.
How practical is this type of conversion on a 50-year-old home? And is it cost-effective? To find out, I began a whole home electrification project at my San Jose residence in 2019. In the course of this six-month project, all fossil fuel devices and appliances in the house were replaced, and a rooftop solar and battery storage system was installed — resulting in a home that is carbon negative. The payback for this conversion was 9.1 years, with an excess of electricity generated during the first year.
This was not a difficult project once I broke it down into individual steps. When it was completed, I was surprised at the financial, comfort, and safety benefits of this conversion. I certainly did not miss my high electric and gas bills, the noisy old HVAC system, or the fumes from my gas stove. In fact, I enjoyed the improved comfort and safety in my house — so I decided to share my experiences.
I started to summarize this project last summer during a Mars-like red sky, light ash occasionally falling, a faint smell of smoke in the air, and utility blackout warnings. Some people say this is the new normal. In all likelihood, it will get worse as we experience more extreme weather events and sea levels rise from melting ice sheets. Many people in California are literally powerless since our utility infrastructure is failing to keep pace with the effects of climate change, magnified by our society’s increasing electric power needs.
Fortunately – with current heat pump, battery, energy efficiency, and solar technology – almost every building in the U.S. with a sunny roof under two stories can be a net generator of energy: carbon negative! Moreover, with grid-connected batteries, buildings can easily provide the resiliency that our grid needs during power shortages and blackouts. And perhaps most importantly, with existing incentives and financing, these conversions can be done on a cost-effective basis. As measures like these are implemented throughout the U.S., we can indeed eliminate CO2 emissions in both our homes and cars.
Time to Burn That Bridge to Natural Gas
Former DOE Secretary Ernie Moniz positioned natural gas as the bridge to renewables. We’ve crossed that bridge; on-site renewables are now cheaper than natural gas for all applications except industrial process heat and long-haul trucking.
Humanity is facing an “all hands on deck” climate change emergency. Since rooftop solar and storage can be installed quickly and inexpensively, we should not stop at carbon zero – we should strive to make all buildings as carbon negative as quickly as possible.
Customer economics for on-site renewables are compelling. Consider a home that uses 1,000 therms of natural gas for space heating per year; at $2/therm, that works out to $2,000/yr. Current heat pump heating systems would consume 8,300 kWh/yr to provide the same amount of heat; at $0.30/kWh, that works out to about $2,500 for electricity.
However, with rooftop solar in the equation at an average rate of $0.10/kWh, annual operating costs for the heat pump heating system would be $830. Based on recorded data for this project, the heat pump water heater consumed about 50 kWh of energy per month; at $0.10/kWh, the cost to heat hot water was approximately $5/month (compared to a monthly water bill of over $100/month).
Overcoming our addiction to fossil fuels is the challenge since buildings consume 28% of total energy use in California. Unfortunately, there is limited literature on real-world electrification experiences of existing buildings. Is a whole home electrification retrofit practical, cost-effective, and comfortable? Is it possible for older buildings to generate excess energy – essentially carbon negative — on an annual basis?
Based on the results from this San Jose electrification retrofit, the answer to these questions is a resounding “yes.”
The table below summarizes the electrification measures, installation costs, energy savings, and dollar savings for this real-world project.
Download the complete White Paper here.
Barry Cinnamon is CEO of Cinnamon Energy Systems (CES), a Silicon Valley solar and energy storage contractor. Previously he was the founder and CEO of Akeena/Westinghouse Solar. Since 2001 he’s completed over 10,000 residential and commercial solar installations, many with batteries. He is a licensed California C-46 Solar and C-10 Electrical Contractor, NABCEP Emeritus solar installer, host of the weekly Energy Show, and former CALSSA President and SEIA Board Member.
