New Environmental Test Community (Knoxville, Oak Ridge: condos, how much, townhomes)

[LauraC]

It looks like an environmental test community is going to be buillt near Crossville, by a Knoxville architectural company, using technologies developed at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The State of Tennessee, the Department of Energy and the TVA will fund it.

The 7000 homes (houses, townhomes, condos) will feature energy saving and generating technologies ORNL has "utilized in its near-zero-energy Habitat houses including solar technology, geothermal heat pumps, structural insulated panels and integrated plumbing walls."

It's an interesting article. This link is to the story on a renewable energy website:

Part Two: A Glimpse of the Energy Future

The houses aren't cheap.

[TnHilltopper]

Excellent post Laura! I personally love this sort of thing... Good ole American ingenuity.

[JMT]

I don't know if I'm excited about this or not. On one hand, a feel-good "green" housing development sounds interesting. On the other hand, it's 7,000 homes built on 6,000 acres (that's a lot of homes), and they're targeting retirees. Wealthy retirees. Thousands of additional retirees for Crossville. I'm glad I don't live there.

[mbmouse]

I kind of agree with JMT here. I really like the idea of the green aspect, I think it is long over due in this country. However starting out with a "test" of 7000 homes? Isn't that a bit excessive? What if the test doesn't work? What will happen to those 7000 homes? Why not start with 40 or 50 homes?

[happyappy]

I’m a tree-hugger so anything that promotes environmentally sound practices is high on my list. And I’m always excited about innovation. In my humble opinion, America should be leading the world in new technologies in equipment, design, and services that foster conservation, alternative energy, and clean environment.

EVERY State should actively promote the aforementioned, and obviously Tennessee is doing so, but it seems to me that a better “test bed” would be one of the States that will be or is now seeing shortages of water and dramatically increasing energy costs.

Then, of course, there is my tired old spiel about importing consumers to circulate money instead of building businesses employing Tennesseans that bring in dollars from other States and from foreign countries—ESPECIALLY foreign countries. I’d prefer to see Tennessee businesses, employing Tennesseans, manufacturing and selling the systems and products developed by ORNL to countries around the world rather than enticing people to buy homes so they can be here to spend money.

But, at least creativity is still alive and well. This motor and generator combination is fascinating. Wish I could examine a set.

[TnHilltopper]

(chuckling) Well don't get me wrong folks... I often refer to myself as the "anti-chamber of commerce". As much as I would love to say that Tennessee is a state full of cannibals watched over by police who look for out-of-staters to ticket and pillage, all while being the nations largest toxic waste dump, awash in glowing green critters that eat people.

Yet still they will come as progress will not be halted. My only hope is that Tennessee will learn from the mistakes of places like Florida and Texas in regards to growth for the sake of growth that leads to ugly sprawl. Hey, if you are going to dream, might as well dream big right?

[strumpeace]

The density sounds way, way too low for this development to be considered truly 'green'. Each house gets .86 acres. Based on development standards in other cities, they should be able to get those 6,000 houses on about 1,800 acres. By increasing density, the amount of land used would be decreased, and that, my friends, would be an ecologically wise thing to do.

That being said, at least TVA is trying something. It's never been concerned about environment before -- so this is a good step.

[happyappy]

Originally Posted by strumpeace

The density sounds way, way too low for this development to be considered truly 'green'. Each house gets .86 acres. Based on development standards in other cities, they should be able to get those 6,000 houses on about 1,800 acres. By increasing density, the amount of land used would be decreased, and that, my friends, would be an ecologically wise thing to do.

That being said, at least TVA is trying something. It's never been concerned about environment before -- so this is a good step.

I agree with the population density theory as it relates to conservation and, in this case, environmental improvement by lower energy usage from conventional means. But I wonder about people in such close contact and what seems to be a common outcome—social unrest. However, maybe it depends on how well designed the denseness of habitat is in its conveniences, aesthetic appeal, common interests, economic advantages, etcetera. After all, New York City seems to do quite well as the highest density population in the US for its size.

I’m a fan of free space and lots of it. I worry about the beautiful open spaces of America disappearing. So, here’s to the prospect of innovation in design of high density living spaces! Who knows, I might be able to adapt—eventually.

[JMT]

Originally Posted by strumpeace

The density sounds way, way too low for this development to be considered truly 'green'. Each house gets .86 acres. Based on development standards in other cities, they should be able to get those 6,000 houses on about 1,800 acres. By increasing density, the amount of land used would be decreased, and that, my friends, would be an ecologically wise thing to do.

That being said, at least TVA is trying something. It's never been concerned about environment before -- so this is a good step.

We don't know how much open space is going to be part of this development. Since it's being marketed to wealthy retirees, there's a good chance it'll have at least one golf course if not two, as well as tennis courts, a clubhouse, probably a cafe or market, probably a swimming pool. Plus, they need to build roads. And with 7,000 homes, I'm sure they're going to include some parks and other open space. I sure hope they're not going to bulldoze the entire 6,000 acres. So the lot sizes are likely to be considerably smaller than .86 acres.

But your point is well taken, big homes on large lots, no matter how many triple-paned windows are used, isn't what most environmental types would consider to be a "green" development.

[happyappy]

I wonder who the “[d]evelopers based in Overland Park, Kansas” are. The number of green developers is increasing all across the country; there’s even a bank in San Francisco that gives special financial considerations to green builders and developers.

This will be interesting to watch in many respects.