In Phase III of Project Get Off the Grid (for those who haven’t been reading previous posts on Project Get Off the Grid, click here to catch up), I haven’t made many changes. Differing variables in the 2008 and 2009 periods of Phase II, namely a ten-day trip to Mexico in 2008, during which I used virtually no electricity, have made a comparison of the two periods difficult. Therefore, in order to get a better idea of the effects my behavioral changes made in Phase II, I’m not doing anything drastic during Phase III.

I have, however, made one small change. I installed a low-flow Evolve shower-head in my shower. Low-flow shower-heads are officially classified as those that use 1.5 gallons of water per minute or less, and Evolve, a company strictly devoted to making eco-friendly shower-heads, has developed a low-flow shower-head that has another water-saving feature.

For whatever crappy plumbing-related reason, I have to run my shower for a few minutes before the water is warm enough for me to comfortably step in, which means I often turn my water on and then leave the bathroom to occupy myself with other things for a bit – checking my email, watching Sportscenter’s Top Ten, etc. More often than not, I return to a shower that is already spraying – and wasting – hot water. I’m sure there are a lot of folks out there like me.

Evolve’s sleek, low-flow shower-heads are specially equipped to turn off once the water temperature reaches a comfortable 95 degrees. When I’m ready to get into the shower, I simply pull a little cord on the shower-head and the water turns on immediately, already at shower temperature. That way, I can watch Sportscenter, check emails, and mess around with Pandora radio stations to my heart’s content, all the while not worrying about wasting any hot water. When I’m ready, I just get into the shower, pull the cord, and I’ve got hot water.

How does this relate to Project Get Off the Grid? Well, it not only saves hot water, it also saves energy, which is used to heat water. When hot water runs down the drain, we’re not only wasting water, we’re wasting energy, which gets tacked right on to our Duke Energy bills.

Although I think the low-flow and turn-off features of my new shower-head will probably save me some water, I won’t be able to quantify it, because I don’t get billed specifically for water use. I’ll admit the lower pressure probably lengthens my showers a bit, but not by much. As far as the energy savings go, I think they will be minimal, but hey, every little bit counts. Try out an Evolve shower-head and you’ll save water, energy, and, eventually, even money.

The changes I made were easy, and they included:

• If I had to purchase food or drink in a plastic container, I always opted for the larger version, if available
  -   For example, I brought two-liter bottles of Diet Coke to work, rather than purchasing a new 20 fl. oz. bottle every day
• I bought a reusable coffee mug to use for my daily coffee (this got me a 10 cent discount, which was a pleasant surprise)
• When grocery shopping, I tried, within reason, to buy foods with minimal plastic packaging
• I ordered less take-out food and made an effort to prepare my own more often, using grocery store ingredients

And that’s about it. Here are the results, in picture form:

The plastic I used during the first ten days of the experiment, during which I went about my standard routine.

The plastic I used during the second ten days of the experiment, during which I made a few small, easy changes to curb my plastic use.

In examining these results, I had a few thoughts. One, considering how much plastic food container waste I built up over the course of the first ten days, I’m shocked that I’m not morbidly obese. I ate all that stuff? Two, I drink way too much Diet Coke. Three, most importantly, by making some very easy behavioral changes, I was able to significantly reduce my plastic use and, even though ten days isn’t a very long time, my “plastic savvy” mindset is already relatively second-nature to me. As an added benefit, I’ve found that the changes I’ve made have forced me to adopt slightly healthier eating habits, because I eat more fruits and vegetables and less pre-packaged, processed snacks.

Obviously, no matter the routine, one should recycle as much as possible. Unfortunately, though, not all plastic can be recycled, so the best solution is to simply avoid using plastic altogether. Try your own “plastic purge” experiment and see what happens.

For those who haven’t read my old posts about Project Get Off the Grid, here’s a quick summary. During each Duke Energy billing period, I’ll be making specific changes in my everyday behavior to reduce my overall energy use. I’ll maintain all the changes I’ve made since the start of the project, adding new changes during each phase in hopes that the accumulated effects of these new habits will have an increasingly beneficial impact on my energy efficiency and, as a result, my energy bills. At the end of each period, to quantify the impact of the changes I’ve made, I’ll be comparing current energy bills to ones for the same period from last year, then posting the results.

In addition maintaining the habits I developed in Phase I of Project Get Off the Grid, I made the following changes in Phase II:

• I resolved to leave my thermostat off, unless it got unreasonably hot or cold in my house
• With two weeks remaining in the billing period, I replaced two of my five standard bathroom vanity bulbs with CFL bulbs (one of the old standard bulbs had burned out, cost: ~$9)

And that’s all. Nothing too crazy, nothing too complicated, nothing too difficult. Believe it or not, I never had to turn my thermostat on once and the temperature of my place never went below 67 degrees and never went above 76 degrees. All houses are different and weather varies by region, and I realize this may not work for everyone, but maybe it’s worth giving it a shot.

Anyway, here are the results:

I apparently managed to cut my energy costs by 3% and my overall energy use by 11%, as compared to last year. Although my monthly charges were very low, the reductions in year over year energy consumption were actually smaller than they were during the previous month, when I had my thermostat on for the majority of the time and I hadn’t installed any CFL bulbs. It all seems somewhat counterintuitive. I’ve just implemented more energy-saving techniques, so one would think I’d be even more energy efficient.

However, I think I’ve identified the explanation for the disappointing, and somewhat puzzling, results; just over a year ago today, I took a ten-day trip to Mexico to see the Monarchs of El Rosario (highly recommended) and explore the Mayan Riviera, which probably kept my home electricity use down to just about nothing for over one third of the billing period. This could explain both the unusually low monthly charges, as well as the fact that I didn’t reduce my energy consumption as much as I did during the January-February period. It’s certainly a possibility and, hopefully, next month’s bill will show a spike in energy efficiency, supporting my suspicions.

In any case, even though I think it might be underestimating, if I can maintain last month’s energy-saving habits over the course of a year, I’d save about $12.50, or 3% (that’s incorporating Duke’s price increases) versus the year before. More importantly, that’s reducing my energy consumption by over 11%, or 475 KWH per year. I have a feeling Phase III of Project Get Off the Grid is going to yield the best results yet. Stay tuned for updates.

It’s one of the primary drawbacks facing the green movement today: the upfront cost that often accompanies going green. Although going green can help us save money in the long run, the amount of time it can take to break even frequently deters even those with the very best intentions (yes, me included). Especially considering the difficulties we’re facing in today’s economic environment (um, yes, me included again), many people just aren’t willing or able to incur this cost, even if they will, eventually, make it back. In many cases, we don’t even know how long “eventually” is.

Fortunately, the Wall Street Journal (I love when green goes mainstream) recently published this great article discussing practical household changes we can make to save energy, save money, and see payback within a reasonable timeframe. Importantly, it also defines what we can expect that timeframe to be.

The article addresses programmable thermostats, water heating efficiency systems, attic, window, door, and duct insulation, low-flow showerheads and faucet aerators, solar panel leasing, air filters, energy-efficient light bulbs, and lighting motion sensors, all of which can help you save energy and will pay for themselves in the relatively short term. Upfront costs range anywhere from free to $1,000, and the time before breaking even ranges from immediate to about seven years.

Of course, numerous variables go into the author’s estimates, many of which he explains, so you’ll have to consider each topic with your specific circumstances in mind if you want a reasonable idea of savings and payback time. In some cases, calculations were made using automated tools that allow for customizable parameters. In case you want to do some calculations specifically tailored to your own situation, I tracked down some of the tools the author used. Here they are:

• For Programmable Thermostats
• For Compact Flourescent Light Bulbs (CFL Bulbs)
• For Drain-water heat-recovery systems

In finding those, I also came across this awesome EnergyStar website, which provides a whole list of similar calculators for all kinds of residential and commercial appliances, fixtures, gadgets, etc. Super helpful for anyone exploring the financial implications of making some environmentally (and potentially economically) conscious home improvements.

I just got the March 2009 issue of National Geographic in the mail.

Side note: Yes, I know we’re supposed to be cutting down on our magazine and catalogue subscriptions, which I’m working on and will discuss in a later post, but National Geographic is one of the few subscriptions that I will be keeping (and that I actually actively subscribe to – the rest just started getting sent to my house after distributors somehow managed to get my home address). It’s simply too superb a publication to give up.

Back to what I was saying… Coincidentally, the March 2009 cover story, “Saving Energy: It Starts at Home”, featuring a couple that attempts to reduce their energy use and carbon footprint, discusses the various ways people can live a more energy-efficient lifestyle. It also divulges all kinds of great facts about energy use in our daily lives and its broader implications. Perfect timing, considering, along with the issue of National Geographic, I also received my latest Duke Energy bill, which will reveal the results of Phase I of Project Get Off the Grid (a very exciting mail day). Anyway, I highly recommend reading the article (and the whole magazine, for that matter). The website actually has some cool extra features, including this one about the carbon footprint of various household appliances and what you can do about it.

Ultimately, the couple featured in the article was able to slash their electricity use by 70% and natural gas use by 40%. Granted, they started out approximately 30% above the national average for a two-person home, but very impressive nonetheless.