1 - ABSTRACT

The goal of this project was to design a sustainable and independent home for a family of four
living in urban St. Louis, MO, given real-life, applicable constraints such as budget and land size.
Following the formal engineering design process, we first conducted the necessary background
research. Topics included the culture and climate of St. Louis, MO, in addition to possible alternative
solutions to incorporate in the house for the main categories of energy generation, water conservation,
and sustainable materials. The team decided to fully power their home with photovoltaic cells in
concert with passive solar design based off of St. Louis propensity for clear days. Our passive solar
design would take advantage of, among other natural and predicted weather trait patterns, the suns
average lower rise in the fall and winter to maximize entering heat and vice versa during the spring and
summer months. To minimize our carbon footprint, the team chose to use mushroom-based insulation
from the New York based company Ecovative, instead of those based off petroleum. In addition, we
decided to implement FSC certified, salvaged wood instead of freshly cut lumber. Water conservation
measures were two-fold: First, the team decided to plant gazania seeds (drought-resistant plants) so to
minimize both monetary and environmental costs of unnecessary watering. Second, using our research
into greywater recycling and rainwater collection patents from both the US and Europe, we
implemented a simple, non-patented system consisting of a perimeter gutter and bucket that would
collect all rainwater for filtration. Together, our detailed cost analysis demonstrated that total cost of
construction - including labor and contracting, but not including the price of land - would amount to
just under $420,000, well under the allotted $500,000 budget.

2 - INTRODUCTION
The need for sustainable resource implementation continues to be on the rise as fossil fuels and
other non-sustainable energy resources decline at an ever-increasing pace. Tackling this problem
requires a thorough analysis of where this energy is being spent on. The goal of this project is to
analyze the typical energy allocation of systems and subsystems in homes in distinct locations in the
United States, especially with regards to those resources that have once been considered cheap, such
as water and lumber. The costs are not just economical; as Earths population continues to increase,
demand for such limited resources proportionally rises, leading to limited supplies and nonsustainability.
Each group was assigned a distinct environment in the United States, and included Hilo, Hawaii
to Anchorage, Alaska. Our group was assigned St. Louis, MO. With a comprehensive understanding of
the areas culture and needs, the problem is to design a sustainable home under certain constraints
such as a $500,000 budget, not including land, and a 1 acre land area restriction. Particular attention
will be paid to components that deal with energy and water usage, as well as in determining the type of
materials to be used for construction and insulation.

3 - BACKGROUND
3.1 - Culture
St. Louis, MO is culturally unique for its relatively optimistic job outlook, recreational
opportunities ranging from major league sports teams to well-maintained sparks and golf courses, and
plethora of hiking and canoeing opportunities not too far from the city center. The city is also known
for its low cost of living; the citys great availability and accessibility are demonstrated by its
nickname, the 20-minute city, given the fact that most recreations and major tourist attractions (like
the Art Museum, the History Museum, and the Symphony hall) are a short distance away from most
residential neighborhoods.1 These factors were carefully taken into consideration in the design of the
home; for instance, the homes garage was designed to hold just one mid-size SUV, with room for a
few bikes and an expanded storage facility, reflecting the populations propensity for walking and
cycling.
3.2 - Climate
St. Louis lies in transitional zone between the humid continental climate type and the humid
subtropical climate type, and its climate indicators, as listed below in Table 3-12, demonstrate this fact.
This data was used in determining appropriate materials for the home, especially with regards to
sustainability. Careful insulation is necessary, considering Januarys subfreezing temperatures. Average
wind speed ranges from a low of 7.6 mph in August to a high of 11.7 mph in March. This makes sense,
as St. Louis has a relatively high frequency of thunderstorms (48 days a year on average), with most of
them occurring in the spring. Furthermore, St. Louis has one of the highest rates of tornadoes out of all
major metropolitan areas in the country, a definite consideration in the design of the home.3

Table31:PertinentclimateindicatorsforSt.Louis,MO

3.3 - Energy Generation

We came up with a trifecta of green energy generation solutions that could be used either in
tandem or with mutual exclusion. The solutions were based off of previous research in regards to
efficient energy systems and are as follows: biofuel packages for stove fuel usage, photovoltaic panels,
and lastly wind turbines powering small appliances in the summer (when gusts are most prevalent in St.
Louis).
Recently the company Biolite has manufactured what is known as the Biolite Homestove, a
device that is a biomass cookstove that by converting waste heat into electricity, reduces smoke
emissions by up to 95% while simultaneously providing users with the capability to charge mobile
phones and LED lights. Figure 3-1 provides the general methodology. Not only is this technology
extremely low cost but it reduces carbon emissions by 91% and smoke by 96%. While Biolite is
intending to spread these abroad in developing nations, this technology would fit perfectly in our self
sustainable home with only the small sacrifice of stove size.4

Figure 3-1: BioLite technology methodology

Moving on, the primary source of energy generation would of course be approximately
$110,000 dollars worth of photovoltaic panels connecting directly to our clients homes electric
system. The process of this energy generation is basic in principle. Essentially, solar panels are installed
6

on either the roof of the abode or on installations in the yard. When light strikes these panels which
incorporate semiconductors, electricity is generated directly and it will be sent through cables to the
battery that the house will implement.
Lastly, the third mode of energy generation that may be used simultaneously with the other
methods but particularly in the summer season, is the wind turbine. St. Louis features strong warm
winds seasonally (in the summer) and these winds can be harnessed to power appliances such as fans
and air conditioning that are used more often during hotm summer days. A small 3000$ wind turbine
from a company such as general electric would provide more than enough energy to power three
typical fans or an air conditioning cooling system.
Table 3-2 lists typical energy consumption rates for common household appliances, such as that
for a microwave oven. Notes are given when appropriate, and it was estimated that total household
energy usage for a family of four would be 69.15 KWH/day.

3.4 - Water Conservation

Our group generated three ideas in the realm of water conservation: rainwater collection,
greywater recycling, and alternatives to grass for the lawn. These ideas could be used individually or in
concert with each other as they are effectively mutually exclusive.

Two ideas that we found for rainwater collection are defined in patents EP2511433A2 and
EP2518226A1 (see Figures 3-2 and 3-3, respectively). The first patent involves tanks that are fed by
the gutters. The tanks are away from the gutters to facilitate easier collection and maintenance. This
system also scales in size based on the building making it ideal for any environment.5 The second
patent is very straightforward and consists of a mechanism attached to a downspout. The water is then
funneled to the side and debris falls down.6 Either of these patents would work well for our house.
However, the downside of both is obtaining the actual products stemmed from the patents. They could
be hard to find due to the patent being filed in Europe.
Another way to conserve water is to recycle greywater. Greywater is generally defined by water
that has been used in bathing. Normally this water is disposed of in a similar manner to blackwater
(water used in toilets). However, this water has the potential to be used again, to be converted to
blackwater. Greywater systems are fairly commonplace and simple to find. However, they could add
substantial cost to the house. We researched into two potential greywater recycling system patents. The
first, a now-defunct 1998 US 57766454 A, features an aerobic and anaerobic tank to filter greywater
(see Figure 3-4).7 The second, the 2001 US 6287469 B1, is designed to be used with a septic tank, for
tertiary sewage treatment by naturally occurring micro-organisms (see Figure 3-5).8
Our final idea for water conservation is using some sort of alternate material for the lawn. Grass
lawns are notorious for their water consumption. One solution could involve installing synthetic turf or
planting drought resistant plants. Either of these options would cut down on water supply. However,
oftentimes homeowner associations place requirements on houses, sometimes making it necessary for
houses to have grass lawns. If this is in place, then synthetic turf could be installed. The main issues
with synthetic turf are environmental impact and installation costs. Drought resistant plants do not
require much water, which makes them an ideal candidate for viable water conservation measures.

Figure32:PatentEP2511433A2,collectswater
fromgutters&depositsintotanks

Figure33:PatentEP2518226A1,fitsaround
downspout&filtersdebrisfromrain

Figure34:PatentUS5766454A:Twotanks,
aerobicandanaerobic

Figure35:PatentUS6287469B1:Usedin
conjunctionwithseptictank

3.5 - Sustainable Materials

Three ideas the group generated for a list of sustainable materials to consider using in our home
design were mushroom-based insulation, placing more emphasis on functional, intact,
recycled/salvaged materials, and striving to use wood that is locally (i.e., within a 400 mile radius of St.
Louis, MOs epicenter) and sustainably grown (i.e., from a company that is Forest Stewardship Council
certified).
Ecovative is a company that specializes in providing sustainable, high-performance materials
for buildings; one of the products they offer is mushroom insulation which holds a Class A fire rating
(ASTM E84), ultra-low VOCs (ASTM E1333), and even a competitive price per R-value, in addition to
being Cradle to Cradle Gold Certified, a mark of sustainability and material health (durability).9 These
benefits, though attractive, are beset by the fact that New York, their primary and central warehouse, is
some 900 miles away from St. Louis, MO.
Our group can also place greater emphasis on recycled/salvaged materials, assuming their
functionality is intact, in order to maintain sustainability. One common method is to implement
reclaimed wood, which has been popular since the 1980s. Pros to using reclaimed wood (besides
sustainability) include a new look and feel, and increased strength and durability due to having

already been exposed to the elements. Cons include scarcity, a higher cost, and legitimacy issues
(reportedly, some retailers may blend old and new wood and pass that off as reclaimed).10
To further support sustainability in our design, we will strive to use as much wood that is locally
and sustainably grown. We searched the FSC (Forest Stewardship Council)s certificate database online
using the state filter, Missouri, to discover that there are a total of 99 architectural or otherwise
woodworking-related organizations certified in the state.11 Pros of striving to use wood that is locally
grown include cheaper shipping costs and therefore greater sustainability. Cons of purchasing from an
FSC certified woodworking organization include higher costs, due to their higher operating costs in
maintaining certification year after year.

10

11

4 METHODOLOGY
4.1 Overview
As can be ascertained in Graph 4-1 below, we underwent five distinct phases in our project,
organized by the standard engineering design methodology:

4.2 Needs Assessment

We began the work for the first stage in the engineering design process, Needs Assessment,
on October 7, 2013, and planned to complete it by October 14, 2013. The work consisted of
determining our clients needs - in this case, specific research focus included determining the culture
and climate of urban St. Louis, MO, and doing background research into popular sustainable energy
currently in use in the area. An average breakdown of standard energy consumption statistics for home
appliances was also conducted, in order to quantify energy needs.
4.3 Problem Formulation
From October 13 to October 16, the group focused on the next step of the engineering design
process, Problem Formulation. Specific tasks included were conducting patent research on water
conservation (rainwater collection and greywater recycling, see Figures 3-2 to 3-5), drafting a Duncker
diagram as shown in Figure 4-2 to better visualize and organize the problem and generate appropriate
solutions, and compiling these and other pertinent information from our Needs Assessment
background research into a Google Presentation. The group presented their progress to the 9:15am
Engineering Design class on October 16.
12

Figure 4-2: Duncker diagram for project

4.4 Abstraction & Synthesis
Work on Abstraction & Synthesis was conducted from October 16 to October 26. On October
17, all three group members met from precisely 10:30am to 11:30am in the common room of floor 6 of
the International Village dormitory complex belonging to Northeastern University to brainstorm
potential alternative solutions to the three major components of Energy Generation, Water
Conservation, and Sustainable Materials. Minutes were taken, and a report was drafted which
included the above ideas expounded by each of the three group members individually doing research
on their assigned component & ideas.
4.5 Analysis
The Analysis portion of the Engineering Design process included drafting up a decision
matrix to quantify the viability of the alternative solutions generated in the previous step of the
engineering design process. Relevant work was completed from October 28 to November 6 using
Google Drives cloud-based software, Spreadsheet, and followed the formal design analysis protocol.
Specifically, the team rank-ordered the design goals (which differed per major component, see Table 41 for an instance), quantifying them using weights (a simple weighting system using the integers 1 to
13

10), rating the alternative design solutions based on our design goals, and finally creating a design
matrix that generated a final metric best quantifying the potential viability of each alternative solution
relative to one another within their respective major component category.

4.6 Implementation
With the viability of each alternative design solution determined, the group proceeded to the
Implementation phase of the formal engineering design process. From November 6 to December 5,
the group worked towards completing a final home design for the urban family of four in St. Louis,
MO. Specific tasks included using Autodesks computer-aided design software, AutoCAD, to generate
blueprints for the plumbing and electrical systems of the home, and implementing the final design
solutions for the three major components of Energy Generation, Water Conservation, and Sustainable
Materials. For detailed information about each specific task, see Chapter 6 Final Design of this
report.

14

15

5 - ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS
5.1 - Introduction
We considered many different solutions for the various problems that are posed while creating
an environmentally friendly house. Three of these ideas came close to final consideration but were
excluded for various reasons. These ideas were: using adobe bricks for the frame of the house, using
available geothermal energy to power a stirling engine which generates electricity, and using wind
power to provide power for the house.
5.2 - Adobe
Adobe bricks have been used by Native Americans for centuries and have proven to be very
effective as insulators in desert conditions. Their durability, insulating power, and natural construction
seem to make them ideal candidates for use in this home. However, the disadvantages were too much to
overlook. Adobe bricks are subject to much wear and tear by the environment.15 This makes them the
subject of ongoing maintenance. The costs of the maintenance can stack up and prove to be restrictive.
In addition, the creation of the bricks themselves is not an easy process. This means that more
expensive labor is needed create the house which makes the entire project more expensive. In addition
to the financial disadvantages, cultural factors must be taken into account. Adobe houses have a much
different look about them as compared to a more conventional house. This could be seen as a downside
to many clients.
5.3 - Stirling Engine
A stirling engine is a type of motor that uses temperature differential to generate mechanical
energy.16 Conceivably, one could use the difference between the heat of the Earth and the ground to
drive a stirling engine which would drive a turbine to generate electrical energy for the house. This,
while a very green option which would provide power to the house, has very distinct disadvantages.
First, the cost of installing a geothermal system is fairly restrictive. As a corollary to this, the price of
maintenance for geothermal systems is both dangerous and expensive.17

16

5.4 - Wind Power

Wind power is a staple in discussions relating to renewable power. While it does have a very
significant advantage which is effectively limitless power, it does have several disadvantages,
especially in this situation. The main disadvantage is that it is not particularly windy in St Louis. The
annual average wind speed is 9.7 miles per hour which is not particularly impressive. Another
disadvantage of wind power in this case is the fairly restrictive price that is associated with wind power.
The price of a 10 kW (nominal) unit, not enough for our house can be as much as 50,000 dollars18
which is half enough to power the house and buying a sufficient number would be more expensive than
a solar array that could power the whole house. In addition, the low wind in the area would most likely
make the unit not perform to its specified level.

17

6 - FINAL DESIGN
6.1 - Introduction
Our group came up with a total of eight (subject to change) different solutions to make our
house more environmentally friendly. They are, building the house with sustainably farmed lumber,
insulating the house with organically based material (such as mushroom based insulation), recycled
material, using renewable power sources, replacing the traditional lawn with drought resistant plants,
collecting rainwater, recycling grey water, planting deciduous trees to cover the house, and passive
solar design.
6.2 - Sustainable Lumber
Sustainable lumber is lumber that has been farmed and cut down in a manner and with timing
that enables the farm to grow back over time.12,19 Another factor that is involved with sustainable
lumber is chain of custody which track who has had the lumber from the point of when it was cut down
to when the consumer is in possession of it. For more information on sustainable lumber, refer to
section 3.5, paragraph 4. This sustainable lumber wood would replace any non-sustainable lumber that
would be used in a more conventional house. Sustainable lumber happens to be more expensive than
conventional lumber due the logging companies having to renew their licenses every year and the
exclusivity of the wood.
6.3 - Insulation
Insulation is an integral component of any house and making said insulation a sustainable
product would be beneficial to making our house more environmentally friendly. The option that we
deemed prudent was using mushroom based insulation to replace the conventional insulation that
would have been used instead.20 For more information on the specific insulation used refer to section
3.5 paragraph 2. As mentioned in section 3.5, this insulation is detrimented by the fact that the main
supply of it is based in New York which is quite far away from St. Louis.
6.4 - Renewable Energy
Renewable energy sources are a staple for an environmentally friendly house. There were three
options that looked favorable for us. They were biofuel packets, wind, and solar. After consideration
18

that was discussed in sections 3.3, we decided on solar power being the most apt for the energy
generation for our house. This consists of an array of solar panels that generate power for our house. As
discussed in section 3.3, the total cost of the array would be 110,00021 dollars and would generate all of
the necessary power for the house. The installed arrays would be placed on the roof of the house and/or
around the house. For a layout of the electrical system of the house refer to appendix A.1, figure 4.
6.5 - Lawn Alternative
The green grass lawn of a house is often shown to be very ubiquitous to the average
American home. However, it is very wasteful and if is replaced by drought resistant plants, much water
can be saved. The solution to this problem was found to be drought resistant plants. These plants are
species that have evolved not need a significant amount of water to survive. Planting these plants in
lieu of a standard lawn would save water for the house. Buying a lawn full of drought resistant plants is
actually not much more expensive than buying a conventional lawn. In St. Louis, a 1000 square foot
lawn can cost around 500 dollars.22 Around the average price for 100 gazania seeds (a drought resistant
flower)23 is five dollars for 100 seeds.24 Assuming one flower per six inches, the same size lawn will
only cost 20 dollars. This, in addition to the fact that they flowers dont need to be watered very much,
cuts down significantly on water usage and overall price.
6.6 - Water Conservation
Rainwater collection was an idea that we agreed to implement in this house. On average, around
37.5 inches of rain fall on the St Louis area per year25, so being able to capture some of this rain would
be helpful in keeping this house environmentally friendly. Collecting rainwater is something that is
very easy to do. One only needs the house to have gutters. Then, only using a bucket and a few
different materials such as a spigot one can attach the gutter to drain into the barrel26. For a detail of this
part of the house, refer to appendix A.1, figure 5. With this solution, one would also need a system of
purifying the water. This normally involves some combination of boiling, chemical treatment, and
filtering27. The price for a barrel is around 100 dollars28 and the price for all of the other items can be
considered negligible. Assuming an average home size of 2500 sq. feet29, and an average of 1 inch of
rain per acre equals 27,154 gallons of water30, one can calculate that every inch of water on a 2500
square foot house is around 1558 gallons. Assuming that around 65% of the water that falls on the
house will flow into the gutter and into the barrel, one can then extrapolate that yearly, around 37,986
19

gallons can be collected in the barrel. This, based on the the lowest rate for water in St. Louis being
$1.7731 per cubic feet, represents a possible savings of almost 9000 dollars.
Grey water recycle is another system of water conservation. Grey water is the water that is
leftover from bathing. This water can be filtered to be used for use in the restroom, where it becomes
black water that has to be sent to a water treatment facility. The specification for a in home water
treatment plant that is designed to be used in conjunction with a septic tank is outlined in patent US
6287469 B1. For a complete look at the plumbing system used in the house refer to the appendix A.1,
figure 6.
6.7 - Passive Solar Design
Passive solar design is the practice of designing a house that takes advantage of the sun to do
the majority of the heating and cooling work, reducing the need for heating systems and air
conditioning.32 Many houses that use passive solar design principles have large windows and are
oriented on a specific axis.
Planting deciduous trees to cover the house during specific seasons is one form of passive solar
design that uses the shade and lack of shade from trees to save energy that would be used to heat and
cool the house. Deciduous trees would be planted around the house in areas where the sun would shine
the most. During the spring and summer, when the trees have their leaves, the sun would be blocked
from hitting the house, making the house cooler and reducing the need for air conditioning. Then
during the fall and winter, the trees lose their leaves and the sun is allowed to shine on the house fully,
reducing the need for heating.
The orientation of the house is another very important aspect of passive solar design. The
general idea is to orient the longest axis of the house in a manner that allows it to get the most amount
of sun during the day. This translates to having a house that is relatively long and thin. The longer axis
of the house is oriented parallel to the east-west axis with large window facing the south.
This orientation is controlled by use of shades and awnings to direct the rays of the sun in
different times of the year. During the spring and summer, the sun shines at a higher angle than during
the fall and winter. This can be taken advantage of by making awnings that come out at a specific angle
and go to a specific distance so during the spring and summer the sun is blocked from entering the
house and during the fall and winter the sun is allowed to enter the house. Using online tools33 we were
able to calculate the necessary length, one and a half meters. For a detail of this part of the house, refer
20

to appendix A.1, figure 7 of the overhang in order to have maximum exposure during the winter and
minimum exposure during the summer. The length of the overhang is based on the height of the
windows, the distance from the window to the overhang, and the latitude of the house.
It is difficult to calculate the savings that will be made due to the use of passive solar design.
This is due to changing weather conditions. However, cutting even a minority of both heating and air
conditioning could represent very significant reductions in energy use.

21

7 - CONCLUSIONS
Our final design satisfies the original goals and needs of our clients by addressing the
admittedly open-ended, yet nevertheless involved prompt to design a sustainable and independent
home. To breakdown the problem, the team focused on optimizing three major components - energy
generation, water conservation, and sustainable materials - with regards to a weighted decision matrix
whose design goals included energy yield, carbon footprint, aesthetics, availability, and price.
The greatest potential risk revolves around the inherent nature of modern technology; PV cells
are continuously becoming more efficient, environmentally friendly, and affordable. Our clients will
realize the steadily falling prices of PV cells - which power 100% of the home - and will undoubtedly
groan in a few years when they realize they couldve saved a lot of money by making a slow transition
to achieving a 100% green status home rather than in one drop.

22

23

8 - RECOMMENDATIONS
Possible issues that the team might run into during the Implementation phase of the formal
engineering design process primarily revolve around time budgeting and technically related issues.
Because of the cornucopia of relatively new technologies that A&M Design Solutions introduced into a
single construction, the potential for error or delay in implementation is higher than in houses that
utilize primarily traditional materials (such as lumber from any particular source). By its very nature,
for instance, sustainable lumber and locally grown lumber are more prone to sudden depletion/delay
than the lumber from any indiscrete source. Time budgeting would thus be a concern; in estimating
construction deadlines, we would have to allow for a larger margin of error.
Further research could be done on the design of our home, especially in topics that were scraped
over or otherwise completely left out in the project, such as performing a cost-benefit analysis rather
than a simple comparison of costs between traditional home design and our sustainable and
independent one. Performing a full cost-benefit analysis as taught in the business school would further
bridge the gap between engineering and practicality that is necessary for a well-implemented project.

24

25

APPENDICES

26

27

A.1 - ARCHITECTURAL LAYOUTS

LayoutTablesLegend:
1. UtilitiesCloset:ContainsWaterHeater,AirConditioning,Inverters,greywateroutput
2. Bedroom1
3. Bedroom2
4. Bathroom1
5. WasherandDryerCloset
6. Bedroom3
7. Bathroom2
8. Kitchen
9. LivingRoom
10. CircuitBreakers
YellowLines:Electricity
ThickBlueLines:CleanWater
GreyLines:GreyWater
BlackLines:BlackWater
ThinBlueLines:Walls
I:Inverter
C:CircuitBreakers
WA:WashingMachine
DR:Dryer
WH:WaterHeater
GO:GreyWaterOut
WO:WaterOut
WD:WaterDisposal
GR:GreyWaterRecycle
SI:Sink
TO:Toilet
SH:Shower
DW:DishWasher
Figure A-1: Isometric view 1
28

Figure A-2: Isometric view 2

Figure A-3: Isometric view 3

Figure A-4: Electrical Layout

29

Figure A-5: Water Collection Detail

30

Figure A-6: Plumbing Layout

Figure A-7: Overhang Detail

31

A.2 - COST ANALYSIS

Table A-2: Cost Analysis for Home

32

Item Name

Material Labor

Equipment

Total

Excavation

3127

819

3946

Foundation, Piers, Flatwork

6593

10597

1666

18856

Rough Hardware

644

1036

164

1844

*Rough Carpentry

22800

32160

54960

*Insulation

7176

2789

9965

*Septic tank

7500

120

7620

*Gutter

750

750

Exterior Finish

12269

7309

861

19578

Exterior Trim

769

1237

195

2006

Doors

1948

1671

3619

Windows

3356

2331

5687

Finish Hardware

325

279

604

Garage Door

Finish Carpentry

1183

6089

7272

Interior Wall Finish

5679

8961

14640

Painting

3393

8095

11488

Wiring36

3445

6646

10091

Lighting Fixtures

2583

830

3413

Flooring

2537

3679

6216

Carpeting

5049

1840

6889

Bath Accessories

1251

787

2038

Shower & Tub Enclosure

798

684

1482

Countertops

2415

2068

4483

Cabinets

7939

2551

10490

Built In Appliances

3863

551

4414

Plumbing Rough-in and Connection37

3625

8997

539

13161

Plumbing Fixtures37

7364

2384

9748

Heating and Cooling Systems

8056

12084

20140

Fireplace and Chimney

786

1179

1965

Item Name

Material Labor
Drought resistant grass

726

Equipment
0

33

Total
0

726

34

A.3 REFERENCES
1.St.LouisRegionalChamber,"QualityofLife."Lastmodified2013.AccessedOctober2,
2013.<http://www.stlrcga.org/x348.xml>
2."St.Louis."climatezone.com.N.p.,n.d.Web.17Nov2013.
<http://www.climatezone.com/climate/unitedstates/missouri/stlouis/>
3.climatezone,"St.Louis."Lastmodified2003.AccessedOctober2,2013.
<http://www.climatezone.com/climate/unitedstates/missouri/stlouis/index_centigrade.htm

4."BioliteInnovation."Biolite:EnergyEverywhere.SuvaDesign,n.d.Web.28Oct2013.
<http://www.biolitestove.com/homestove/homestovetechnology/>.

5."EstimatingHomeApplianceandElectronicEnergyUse.".energy.gov,31Aug2012.
Web.9Oct2013.
<http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/estimatingapplianceandhomeelectronicenergyuse>

6.Bell,RobertB.etal.Apparatusforharvestingrainwater.PatentEP2518226A1.13Oct
2012.

7.Glackin,Desmond.Rainwaterharvestingbymeansoflinearelevatedtanks.PatentEP
2511433A2.17Oct2012.

8.Ashburn,PaulR.etal.Homewastewatertreatmentplant.PatentUS6287469B1.
11Sep2001.
35

9.Catanzaro,Michaeletal.Homewastewatertreatmentanddenitrificationsystem.Patent
US5766454A.16Jun1998.
10."Insulation."Evocative.N.p.,n.d.Web.18Oct2013.
<http://www.ecovativedesign.com/>.
11.Joshua,Johnson."TheProsandConsofUsingReclaimedWood."J.Aaron.N.p.,24Apr
2012.Web.18Oct2013.
<http://www.jaaronwoodcountertops.com/wordpress/usingreclaimedwood/>.
12."FSCCertificateDatabase.".ForrestStewardshipCouncil,n.d.Web.18Oct2013.
<http://info.fsc.org/>.
13."Homewyse."CostofReclaimedWoodFlooring.N.p.,n.d.Web.29Nov2013.
<http://www.homewyse.com/costs/cost_of_reclaimed_wood_flooring.html>.
14."Homewyse."CostofFoamInsulation.N.p.,n.d.Web.25Nov2013.
<http://www.homewyse.com/costs/cost_of_reclaimed_wood_flooring.html>.
15."Advantagesanddisadvantagesofmudbuilding."2001.
<http://www.bukisa.com/articles/126495_advantagesanddisadvantagesofmudbuilding/>.
16.Nice,Karim."HowStirlingEnginesWork."
<http://www.howstuffworks.com/stirlingengine.htm>.
17.Siegel,RP."GeothermalEnergy:ProsandCons."2012.
<http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/06/geothermalenergyproscons>.

36

18."SmallWindTurbinesforHomes&Businesses."<http://bergey.com/wind
school/residentialwindenergysystems>.
19.Heselbarth,Rob."WhatisCertifiedLumber?."2008.
<http://www.forresidentialpros.com/article/10355992/whatiscertifiedlumber>.
20."EvocativeDesign."
<http://www.ecovativedesign.com/>.
21."BerkeleyLab."InstalledPriceofSolarPhotovoltaicCells.N.p.,n.d.Web.26Nov2013.
<http://newscenter.lbl.gov/newsreleases/2013/08/12/installedpriceofsolarphotovoltaicsystemsin
theuscontinuestodeclineatarapidpace/>.
22."CostofLawnTurf."2013.
<http://www.homewyse.com/costs/cost_of_lawn_turf.html>.
23.Perry,Leonard."NorthernDroughtResistantPlants."2002.
<http://pss.uvm.edu/ppp/pubs/oh73drought.htm>.
24."GazaniaBulkPrice."<https://www.google.com/search?
q=gazania&oq=gazania&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.319j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&
ie=UTF8/>.
25."AverageAnnualPrecipitationGraphsforSt.Louis,Missouri."
<http://www.crh.noaa.gov/lsx/?n=avgpcp>.
26."HowtoBuildaRainwaterCollectionSystem."<http://www.wikihow.com/Builda
RainwaterCollectionSystem>.

37

27.Williams,Mike."CanWaterCollectedinaRainBarrelBePurifiedtoDrink?."
<http://homeguides.sfgate.com/canwatercollectedrainbarrelpurifieddrink78356.html>.
28."GoodIdeas55gal.BigBlue."<http://www.homedepot.com/p/GoodIdeas55galBig
BlueRB55BLUE/203079116>.
29.Meyerowitz,Robert."SizeMatters."2011.<http://www.stlmag.com/StLouisAT
HOME/JanuaryFebruary2011/SizeMatters/>.
30."ConvertingRainfallFromInchestoGallons."2010.
<http://www.examiner.com/article/convertingrainfallfrominchestogallons>.
31."WaterRates."2010.
<http://www.stlwater.com/waterrates.php>.
32.Wikipediacontributors."PassiveSolarBuildingDesign."Wikipedia,TheFree
Encyclopedia.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_solar_building_design>.
33.Gronbeck,Christopher."OverhangDesign."
<http://www.susdesign.com/overhang/index.php>.
34."HomeAdvisor."HowMuchDoesitCosttoInstallaSepticTank?.N.p.,n.d.Web.26Nov
2013.<http://www.homeadvisor.com/cost/plumbing/installaseptictank/>.
35.buildingcost.net.N.p.,n.d.Web.3Dec2013.
<http://buildingcost.net/CompMatrix.asp>.
36."CosttoInstallElectricalWiring."
<http://www.homewyse.com/services/cost_to_install_electrical_wiring.html>.
38

37."HowMuchDoesitCosttoInstallNewPlumbingPipes?."
<http://www.homeadvisor.com/cost/plumbing/installnewplumbingpipes/>.

39