SEASONAL ENERGY STORAGE AND NET ZERO HOME DESIGN

Carl Howlett Howlett Technologies LLC 1583 East 1500 North Logan, UT 84341

T J Gordon PO Box 66 Clarkston, UT 84305

ABSTRACT Solar radiation offers an adequate, sustainable energy source to meet a single family residences thermal and electrical energy needs. Daily and seasonal fluctuations in solar electricity generation can be absorbed and augmented by the commercial grid. However, no such reservoir exists for fluctuations in solar thermal energy capture, making residence-based seasonal thermal energy storage an attractive concept. This paper examines some practical approaches to achieving that goal. Understanding the fundamental principles of energy transfer will offer some rules of thumb by which to avoid the expense inherent in traditional modeling and design. A buried container, properly sized and insulated, can store sufficient thermal energy to heat a modest home throughout an average winter, even in a cold climate. Thoughtful construction of the home, using some novel but practical methods, can greatly improve its thermal efficiency. Together, practical thermal energy storage and efficient energy handling can render a house virtually self-sufficient.

summer. For most areas of the United States, energy requirements for winter heating generally far exceed those for summer cooling. The poor match between a homes seasonal heating/cooling requirements and seasonal solar energy availability is a design dilemma not easily overcome. One suggested solution to this dilemma is designing a solar collection system to meet anticipated worst-case or nearworst-case conditions, with a backup alternative if those conditions are exceeded. For example, one could design a homes solar thermal system to maintain comfort for a week of winter seasonal average minimum temperature under an overcast sky. If the temperature fell below that minimum, or overcast conditions prevailed longer than a week, the system would revert to the backup alternative heat source. If one adds the design goal of annual net-zero energy consumption, energy from this alternative source would have to be paid back at some point in the energy year. Typically, the bank for energy storage is the commercial electrical grid. The grid is not truly an energy storage system, since energy generated and sent to the grid must be used the very moment it is received, whether that energy is generated by a home solar-electric system or a commercial power plant; the power plant accommodates fluctuating home-generated electrical energy by varying its own generation to meet grid-wide momentary needs. However, even using the grid for excess energy storage, a solar system designed to supply all of a homes immediate thermal and electrical needs over an average winter will be grossly oversized for summer requirements. While this is

1. INTRODUCTION Using solar energy as the source to meet the electrical and thermal needs of a single family residence will inevitably encounter the conundrum of having far too much solar energy in the summer, when its least needed, and far too little for the cold winter. In the mid latitudes, the mid-winter insolation is typically only about 25% of that in mid-

not a huge problem for solar-generated electricity, which can supply excess energy to the grid, it is a problem for solar-generated heat, because a solar thermal system has no place to deliver the excess thermal energy. A second suggested solution, therefore, is to design a solar thermal/electrical system to meet the homes annualized energy needs rather than the worst-case needs of winter. This would entail reducing the size of the solar thermal system element, using the grid to compensate for solar thermal energy shortfall during the winter, and using the solar electrical system element to repay this debt to the grid during the summer. Interestingly, however, the likely result of this approach would be to eliminate the solar thermal system element completely. Irrespective of its size and the fundamental efficiency of solar thermal panels, the solar elements thermal energy output will always be wasted during the summer, unless converted to electrical energy by some type of heat engine and generator not likely at the home level. While insolation is free, a solar thermal system to provide a homes winter heat is inherently wasteful in the summer, and therefore very inefficient. Furthermore, given the <15% effective efficiency of solar cells in supplying power, overbuilding a solar electrical system as the sole energy source for a home, even with payback to the grid, is also an unhappy solution, inasmuch as it robs a system of the inherent efficiency of solar thermal panels in favor of a less efficient substitute. Solving this problem requires the ability to store thermal energy. To be seriously considered viable for energy storage and transport, a candidate technology must meet several criteria: it must actually work; it must be simple, reliable, widely applicable, long-lived, and inexpensive; it must be easily controllable on both a daily and seasonal basis; it must require a minimum of service and involve no hazardous materials. The dominant residential heat sources now in use natural gas, LPG, oil and electricity each receive very high marks in meeting most of these criteria, and each in its own way provides for seasonal variability in demand with virtual, if not literal, storage. However, there remains one criterion for residential heat which each of these sources fails dismally to meet: that of renewability. Arguments as to the size of the worlds fossil fuel reserves aside, nobody believes those reserves to be infinite. Homes

warmed only with natural gas furnaces or with electric resistance heaters using energy from coal-fired power plants will, inevitably, go cold. The future belongs to thermal energy storage systems based not on a vanishing resource but on solar radiation a resource that in human terms is infinitely renewable. The design solution proposed here incorporates an underground method for storing the excess thermal energy generated by a homes solar thermal system in the summer for use during the winter, thereby optimizing the overall system efficiency. This solution permits sizing the thermal system to meet average seasonal (winter) demands, and sizing the solar electrical system to meet the total annual electrical demand. Connection to the grid would provide energy necessary to make up for any temporary deficiencies in the thermal system, and accept payback for any energy so used.

2. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS Seasonal energy storage has two fundamental requirements: a storage reservoir and a storage medium. Designing a thermal energy storage reservoir and selecting a storage medium both involve engineering and design choices which can consume a great deal of time and money. A goal of this paper is identifying the significant engineering challenges and offer some methods of making sound design decisions while circumventing the need for rigorous, time-consuming and costly analysis. Consider first a storage reservoir. Properly designed and constructed, an energy storage container can effectively store a seasons thermal energy. The principles guiding the design of such a container apply as well to the design and construction of a house, and understanding these principles is key to implementing designs that will effectively harness the suns thermal energy. Thermal energy storage containers fall into two broad categories. The first case is quite simple and familiar: a hot container in a medium dominated by convection to air and radiation to other materials and to space e.g., a house. The dominant principle governing thermal energy storage in this case is that container volume is a cube function, related to the product of the containers linear dimensions (length x width x height, or radius cubed), while its surface area is a

square function (height x length, or radius squared). For convenience, a containers linear dimensions may be taken as the cube root of its volume. Thermal energy stored within the volume escapes through the surfaces; thus heat loss rate for a given volume of material within the container will be inversely related to the containers linear dimensions. (For this relationship to be strictly true, the container must be reasonably close to a cube or a sphere; shapes having relatively more surface area will be less effective as thermal containers.) The second case involves a thermal storage container immersed in a uniform, thermally conductive medium such as soil. Such media have both thermal conductivity and heat capacity (the ability to store heat). The ratio of heat conducted to heat stored is the mediums thermal diffusivity, which governs how heat will flow from the container into the medium. Heat flows in the direction of thermal gradients at a rate dependent on the magnitude of the gradient, and in a direction perpendicular to contours of equal temperature (isothermals). While conductivity is not time dependent, heat capacity is: heat flows into the material over time to heat it up. Once sufficient heat has flowed into a volume of material to heat it to the temperature of the heat source (or to reach the materials heat capacity), the effect of heat capacity disappears, and the only effect governing heat flow from the container is the mediums thermal conductivity or resistance. Both the earths surface and a buried thermal storage container exhibit annual temperature variations the former from seasonal weather patterns and the latter from corresponding varying energy supply and withdrawal. These variations generate thermal waves propagating within the soil away from the sources of heat. The physical wavelength of these thermal waves is measured in feet (meters), as is the distance for the time variations to become strongly attenuated. At a depth of about 10 to 20 feet (3 to 6 m) in most soils, the solar-driven temperature variations have disappeared, and the soil temperature is steady at very near the annual mean air temperature. The thermal waves from a storage container propagate and are damped in a similar manner. Rapid attenuation of these annual temperature waves allows thermal analysis to consider only annual mean temperatures while still providing sufficient accuracy for design purposes a significant calculation simplification.

When a container is deeply buried in soil (10 or more container linear dimensions below grade), one may examine its thermal characteristics in a spherical coordinate system using only one dimension (radius), without significant loss of accuracy, again greatly simplifying the analysis. In such a case, tank volume increases as the cube of radius, surface area increases with the square of radius, and overall container heat loss rate increases linearly with radius. Thus the unit volume heat loss from the tank varies as the reciprocal of the radius squared (or surface area). This is an enormous advantage to large, deeply buried thermal containers. Heat loss through long distances of soil is potentially very low for large, deeply buried systems, even though soil thermal conductivity is about 25 times greater than typical urethane insulation. This discussion implies that by considering the soil to be uniform, homogenous and static, one can fairly easily calculate its efficiency as an insulating medium. Calculating the size of a container necessary to hold the required thermal energy, one can then simply bury it deeply enough in the ground to provide the insulation needed to store that thermal energy and be done with it. The catch, unfortunately, is that the soil is neither uniform, homogenous nor static. The primary culprit is water; damp soil is much more highly thermally conductive than dry soil, and water moving through the soil compounds the problem. A second difficulty lies in the fact that burying a container shallowly (e.g., four feet of soil above the top) is both far more practical and less expensive than burying one deeply (e.g., with 10 or multiples of the container dimensions worth of soil above it). In the shallow case, however, analyzing heat flow from the container even in a uniform, homogenous and static medium can no longer be done using a simple spherical coordinate system: heat loss from the container will be asymmetric, with the bulk of the loss from the top and upper sides of the tank to the grade surface, where it can be lost to the air. While a shallow container eliminates the excavation difficulties encountered in burying a container deeply, it introduces a much greater complication in thermal analysis. The practical solution to this dilemma is not to consider the soils insulating properties at all, but to insulate the container itself to R-value of 65 (11.4 C/W). In most cases, the soil is likely to have a conductivity on the order of 25

times that of the insulation, and will thus provide some additional thermal resistance to heat flow from the container. But even if it does not, the R-value 65 (11.4 C/W) insulation designed in will enable the container to store sufficient thermal energy for a seasons use. There are also some simple design enhancements that can mitigate the effects of water flowing in the soil and enhance the soils thermal resistance. Where seasonal precipitation is significant, a waterproof sheet laid in the ground over the tank and extending roughly a containers dimension beyond it in all directions can re-direct downward-percolating moisture away from the tank. In soil known to be damp, footing drains such as those used around basements can also direct water away from the container. As regards a storage medium, the two most important criteria for such a medium are specific heat and density (specific gravity). Specific heat is a measure of how much thermal energy a given mass can hold for a degree of temperature change. Specific gravity and specific heat together determine how much thermal energy a volume of material can absorb for a degree of temperature change. Water, with a specific heat of 1.0, is a particularly good choice as a storage medium. Stone and similar materials, though much more dense (higher specific gravity) than water, have specific heat values of only about 0.2. When wet, their specific heat rises, but only due to the contribution from water. Its combination of specific heat and specific gravity make water a superior energy storage medium. Water, like any liquid, is easy to get heat into and out of; it is easily pumped and circulated; it is safe, common and inexpensive. However, water has a relatively low boiling point, which limits maximum storage temperatures to about 180F (82C). The development of a storage technology capable of operating at temperatures higher than this could render stone a more attractive medium than water. In this evaluation, all seasonal energy storage systems use either water or a combination of water and stone.

Canada is notable. A community seasonal thermal energy storage demonstration project, Drake Landing serves 52 single-family residences from a common large seasonal energy storage site. However, while Drake Landing is an important in-our-ownbackyard demonstration of successful seasonal thermal energy storage, it is unlikely to have significant impact on the design of systems for single-family residences. For one thing, the project involved far more engineering cost than can be tolerated for a single-family residence. For another, the site selection requirements are extremely stringent. For a site to satisfactorily accommodate a Drake Landing-type energy storage system, it must have absolutely no ground water, at any time, within the storage volume. As noted above, ground water, particularly if moving, is very efficient in transporting thermal energy away from the storage field and providing somebody downhill with a wonderful warm spring. Very few locations could qualify for a Drake Landing type thermal storage system. Although the fundamental principles favoring the Drake Landing system large reservoir size and deep reservoir burial tend to work against the concept of a similar but smaller system to provide local storage for a single-family residence, they also define drivers in developing a design that will respond to the physical realities. To have an impact on a significant number of single family residences, seasonal thermal energy storage needs to be applicable to a wide variety of locations and circumstances and accessible to competent builders, without the need for a significant amount of engineering support or excessive site testing. Although no single technology will suit all locations, some appropriate technologies do exist, and several approaches to residential energy storage are viable. Each will work, but each has properties and limitations that demand a knowledgeable, informed approach to matching a home site with a storage technology. A rough idea of the thermal energy storage requirement for a single-family dwelling will provide a benchmark against which to evaluate candidate technologies. Based on 5 years government data from weather stations and local airports, an average six-month heating season in southeastern Idaho consists of about 7,850 F (4,361 C) heating degree-days (HDD). The data show contributions to the total annual HDD in every month of the year, including July and August when the need for home heating is vanishingly small. Large

3. RESIDENTIAL THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE Thermal energy storage systems constructed to date have tended to be large and, in many cases, designed for shortterm rather than seasonal use. Most such examples are European, although the Drake Landing project in Alberta,

diurnal temperature variations in the dry, inland climate (up to 50F [28C]) make ventilation suitable and sufficient for heating during the spring and fall transition seasons and for cooling during the summer. Ventilation reduces the effective annual HDD to about 6,200 F (3,444 C) HDD. An exceptionally well-insulated house of moderate size (about 2,516 ft2 [234 m2] on one floor) will require about 2x107 BTU (2.1x1010 J) to meet this need. (Design features for a house of this thermal efficiency appear later in this article.) Conservatively assuming a 50% heat loss to the environment from a thermal energy storage system over the course of a year means such a system must be capable of storing 4x107 BTU (4.22x1010 J). In practice, this conservative number may be reduced by the houses solar heat gain in the winter, as well as other considerations appearing elsewhere in this paper, but these effects are not included in this analysis. The first storage system to be considered is a water-only system. As noted, waters low boiling point limits the maximum functional temperature to about 180F (82C). At hotter temperatures, the water vapor pressure becomes significant, and the efficiency of solar panels even evacuated tube collectors drops markedly. Water temperatures over 180F (82C) also make using a tank liner very difficult. On the cold end, 90F (32C) marks the arbitrary minimum usable water temperature. The 90 F (50 C ) temperature difference, waters specific heat of 1.0 and the 4x107 BTU (4.22x1010 J) requirement all translate into a required storage volume of about 4.7x104 gallons (~1.78x105 L) or 6,300 ft3 (178 m3) an 18.5-foot (5.63 m) cube. (Note that the low minimum temperature of 90F [32C] presents a significant challenge requiring design innovations to develop a heat exchange system that will deliver heat to the home environment.) Ten inches (25 cm) of urethane foam will insulate the reservoir to an R-value of 65 (11.4 C/W). Burying the reservoir in soil assumed to be at a nearly-constant 50F (10C) very nearly the mean air temperature for the southeastern Idaho study location creates a yearly mean temperature difference across the insulation of 85 F (mean water temperature of 135F less the 50F mean soil temperature). (57C mean water temperature less 10C mean soil temperature = 47 C difference across the insulation.) Calculation shows that under these conditions, the annual

heat loss from the reservoir will be about 2.2x107 BTU (2.34x1010 J) very close to the driving assumption in initially sizing the reservoir. Immediately after an insulated hot reservoir is placed in the soil, the temperature at the outer surface of the insulation is equal to the ambient soil temperature. After some time, the soil temperature will increase as thermal energy from the reservoir crosses the insulation boundary and is stored in the soil; this has the effect of raising the temperature on the outside of the insulation, decreasing the inside-to-outside thermal gradient, and slowing the flow of heat from the reservoir. After a long time when transients die out, the soil appears as an insulator. As noted above, the soils insulating properties will augment the R-value 65 (11.4 C/W) insulation designed into the reservoir; this augmentation will be site-specific, and because of its variability is not considered a driving element in designing the reservoir. Constructing an 18.5-foot (5.63 m)-cubic underground storage reservoir is not a trivial undertaking, particularly given the assumption that the reservoir will lose roughly half its stored energy to the environment, and examining options for increasing its efficiency is wise. Specific options exercised will, of course, depend on specific site conditions and requirements, but one possibility is extending the operating temperature lower limit down from 90F (32C) to 50F (10C). Keeping the maximum at 180F (82C) would lower the mean temperature from 135F (57C) to 115F (46C), which would make the solar thermal panels supplying energy more efficient and lower the reservoir heat loss. In order for this system to heat and maintain a house at 70F (21C), the temperature of the water going through the forced-air heat exchanger or floor hydronic radiators must be at least 90F (32C). When the water in the underground storage reservoir falls below this, a commercially available heat pump at the in-house heat exchanger could increase the temperature of the incoming water to about 100F (56C) by drawing heat from the underground storage reservoir, enabling extraction of stored heat at reservoir temperatures normally far too low to be used for heating (e.g., 50F [10C]). A heat pump is extremely efficient, pumping more than 10 times the energy from the reservoir water (depending on the reservoir temperature) than the energy it consumes in operation. The advantages are truly significant, but will increase the energy debt to be repaid to the power

grid during the summer. Another option would be to build the reservoir beneath the house in what would have been the basement, in which case what would have been winter heat loss to the outside air from the top of the reservoir would instead be winter heat gain in the house, lowering its overall heat requirements. As discussed above, a heat pump that withdrew thermal energy from the storage reservoir would lower the mean reservoir temperature, reducing the temperature gradient across the insulation and consequently further reducing heat loss to the environment. Less energy lost from the reservoir and the house itself translates to a lowered storage requirement, which in turn would allow reducing the reservoir volume to approximately 3x104 gallons (1.14x105 L). (If the reservoir were within the house envelope, the water would need to be contained within a sealed bladder to prevent evaporation and a very serious house moisture problem.) One intriguing, low-cost concept that uses a rock-plus-water storage medium involves excavating a bowl-shaped depression in the ground in soil that has no water table, forming a pit with relatively steep (but not vertical) sides. A 2-3 foot (0.7-1.0m) thick layer of perlite on the inside of this excavation serves as insulation, and over it lies a plastic or rubber pond liner held in place by gravel filling the pit to within a few feet of grade level. In the bottom of the pit are both a recirculating water pump and the heat exchanger for a heat pump which will withdraw heat for the house; on top of the gravel is a heat exchanger for a solar heat system, and a system of pipes connected to the recirculating pump at the bottom to distribute water. Water fills the excavation up to the level of the gravel. Heated by the solar system heat exchanger and circulated by the recirculating pump and distribution system, the water makes intimate contact with the gravel in the pit for even heating, and provides the heat source for the heat-pump heat exchanger in the bottom. With a plastic vapor barrier over top of the pit, 2-3 feet (0.71.0m) of perlite insulation and a skim of topsoil, the aboveground application could be a ground-heated hothouse for Idahos earliest tomatoes. For areas where meteorological conditions are marginal for efficient seasonal solar thermal energy storage, a carbonneutral or carbon-negative solution to heating water for thermal storage may be found in a biochar system. Scrap wood, plant waste and other carbonaceous material, heated

in the oxygen-free environment of a pyrolizer, will release combustible gases. Once this emission begins, burning these gases continues the pyrolysis, and waste heat from the process heats the water in the thermal storage reservoir. At the end of the process, the carbonaceous material is reduced to biochar essentially charcoal and the waste heat has provided a few weeks or months additional thermal energy to the water storage. Applied to soil as an additive, the biochar not only increases soil fertility, but remains in the soil for centuries, effectively sequestering the carbon.

4. THE THERMALLY EFFICIENT HOUSE Constructing an efficient thermal energy collection/storage system is pointless if the house for which it provides heat is not efficient in its use. The prior discussion assumed a 2,516 ft2 (234 m2) house in an annual 7,850 F (4,361 C ) HDD environment (reduced to an effective 6,200 F [3,444 C] HDD by ventilation heating during the spring and fall transition seasons) which required only about 2x107 BTU (2.11x1010 J) for a year. The design of this house is not constrained by any architectural style requirements. Architectural elements heightening thermal efficiency (e.g., maximizing winter solar gain, minimizing exterior corners and protruding elements) are certainly desirable, but in this example they play no part in driving the house design. Thermal infrared photographs of the outside of a typical house invariably show many locations where heat is lost from the interior. Heat leaks away from windows, doors and the framing around them. It escapes where roof trusses rest on wall sill plates and from the junction between walls and floors. Most of the weight-bearing elements of the house roof, walls, floor, foundation and footings are in direct contact with the outside environment on one side and the interior living space on the other, forming a channel through which heat escapes. Wood has an R-value of about 1 per inch (.07C/Wcm), making it neither a good thermal conductor nor a good insulator. Concrete, stone, masonry, brick and similar materials have an R-value of about 0.1 per inch (.007C/Wcm) , making them very poor insulators. A wood framed wall normally has studs every 16 inches (0.41m), but they are usually doubled around door and window openings. A single wood base plate runs the length of every wall, and typically the top plate is doubled. All this means a wood

framed wall is approximately 10% solid wood, connecting the warm inside directly to the cold outside. If the wall studs were 2x6 lumber (R value~ 5.5 [0.97 C/W]) and the wall were insulated with good fiberglass (R-value 22 [3.9 C/W]), the overall wall would have a thermal resistance of less than R-value 17 (3 C/W). Making a thermally efficient wall means eliminating as much as possible the wood thermal connection between inside and outside. One possible solution is building the outside load-bearing wall using standard construction techniques, but building a second wall inside which is unconnected (or minimally connected at best) to the outside wall. If this wall were 12 inches (0.31 m) thick with halfinch (1.3 cm) sheetrock on the inside, half-inch (1.3 cm) sheathing on the outside covered with R-value 7 (1.2 C/W) foam insulating sheathing and a stucco finish, the overall wall would be approximately R-value 55 (9.8 C/W). A similar situation exists with the roof; typically roofs provide many thermal paths from the attic space to the cold exterior. The design of a thermally efficient house should incorporate a pitched roof using 16-inch (0.4m) deep engineered floor joists (TJI or equivalent) as rafters on 24inch (0.6m) centers, with all of the insulation (dense-pack fiberglass) in the rafters. The rafter web material, approximately one-half inch (1.3 cm) thick, is the only thermal connection between the attic and the outside. This design results in a roof with an approximate R-value of 62 (8.4 C/W). Windows typically present a serious heat loss. Although Energy Star standards qualifying for tax rebates (2010) require an overall R-value 3.3 (0.58C/W) rating for windows, large areas of R-value 3.3 (0.58C/W) rather defeat the purpose of building an R-value 55 (9.8 C/W) wall. Some sophisticated windows have thermal performance of R-values 8 to 9 (1.4 - 1.6 C/W), but require xenon gas fill. The problem could be mitigated somewhat by installing two sets of windows one on the outside wall and a second in the window jamb or on the inside surface. This will result in something better than R-value 7 (1.2 C/W), which though improved still permits excessive heat loss. Installing three commercially available triple-glazed windows in series in a window opening and sealing the two air spaces between them increases the window insulation to around R-value 17 (3 C/W). This technique is applicable

both to fixed windows and to those required by fire and building codes to open for emergency egress. Two-inch (50 cm)-thick exterior doors filled with urethane foam are rated at about R-value 10 (1.8 C/W). Replacing the urethane foam with evacuated super insulating panels will substantially raise the performance. The panels are rated at about R-value 50 (8.8C/W), but installing them in 100% of the door area would not be possible. Nevertheless, using such panels could easily raise the overall door insulation to R-value 20 (3.5 C/W). Furthermore, addition of a storm door or vestibule would raise the effective insulation even further. Air infiltration is an additional important heat loss mechanism requiring careful control. All vented combustion devices must draw combustion air directly from the outside, and vent combustion products directly to the outside, through sealed, insulated vents that ensure no air from within the heated house envelope is either used in combustion or lost to exhaust. Careful definition of sealing surfaces (outside sheathing, inside outer surfaces of wall cavities and interior sheetrock) can result in house envelope infiltration rates near zero. All wiring and plumbing penetrations must be sealed. Heat recovery ventilators can minimize the infiltration effects associated with ventilation required for code, comfort and moisture control. Connected to bathroom and stove vents, these ventilators use warm air exiting the house to heat the cold air entering the house. Windows and doors must be carefully sealed and the infiltration rates (in the case of a window, the advertised rate times the window area) minimized. One effective technique is to use fixed windows everywhere that fire ingress and egress codes do not require windows that open. Clothes dryers are usually a significant detriment to an energy efficient house. They provide a large infiltration path that is not effectively blocked, particularly when the inside air pressure exceeds the outside pressure because of wind. Although washers and dryers could be located outside the heated house envelope, that is likely to be an undesirable option. A better solution is to filter the exhaust air of an electric dryer to remove lint and circulate the warmed air through the house, which will add heat to the home at a rate of between 105 and 1.5x105 BTU/hour (107 1.5x107 J/hr.). In a typical house moisture from a load of wash will raise the inside humidity less than 5%; in cold

regions where house humidity is often uncomfortably low, this may be an added benefit. As designed, the 2,516 ft2 (234 m2) house has a total exterior wall area is about 2,990 ft2 (277 m2). Of this, doors and windows make up 220 ft2 (20m2), conservatively estimated at R-value 15 (1.6 C/W), and the remaining 2,770 ft2 (257 m2) is R-value 55 (9.7C/W). Because of its pitch, the total roof area is 2,813 ft2 (261 m2) at R-value 62 (8.4 C/W). Calculation shows that during a 6,200 F (3,444 C) HDD heating season, the approximate conducted heat loss is 1.67x107 BTU (1.8x1010 J), even considering those infiltration effects that are beyond practical, cost-effective control well under the estimated 2x107 BTU (2.11x1010 J) available from the underground reservoir.

This is very much a first-order analysis. It neither imposes restrictions on nor accounts for positive or negative effects of architectural design. It is inherently conservative, in that it acknowledges but does not include the effect of potential gains outside the design (e.g., solar gain through windows and illuminated exterior walls, surface films [contact resistance], heat from electrical consumption, human or animal metabolic heat, etc.). The simplified approaches identified in this paper can be developed into a range of design options and guidelines offering an alternative costly, site-specific engineering analysis. Using these guidelines, architects and builders will be able to design and build homes for tomorrow that are maximally efficient in storing and using solar energy, closely approaching if not actually meeting the goal of netzero off-grid energy independence.

5. CONCLUSION The attractive idea of using solar energy for home heating inevitably runs afoul of the fact that maximum seasonal home heating requirements occur exactly when the solar heat availability is at minimum. While the concept of storing summers heat for winters use has been experimentally addressed on a community level for instance, the Drake Landing development in Alberta, Canada the approach taken at that level is impractical for single-family residence design in terms of scale, engineering analysis and expense. Because no single design is universally applicable, building efficient homes with this goal in mind has required intensive engineering modeling based on considerable site analysis to inform the design a very expensive and time-consuming process. Alternatively, homes can be built largely by guesswork, resulting in homes that either fail to even approach net zero performance, or are grossly over-designed and over-built, costing the builder and owner much more than justified and producing an inefficient, wasteful home. This paper offers some preliminary guidelines for designing a storage system tailored to a single-family residence that minimize or avoid completely the need for intensive engineering modeling and analysis. It suggests some novel applications of commercially available products and wellunderstood technologies, and points to some rules of thumb for the design and construction of a system to store thermal energy collected during the heat of summer and to use it efficiently during the cold winter months.