SOLAR DECATHLON INTERVIEW
6) How did you complete the training process?
Except for construction, we did not have formal training.
Most of the project was learn-as-you-go.
7) How did you create your technical infrastructure?
Most of the technical infrastructure was developed during the solar lab course in engineering. Engineering,
computer science, and architecture students worked
together to develop technical strategies for the house.
After a plan was developed, we met with professors and
professionals to learn how to best execute it.
8) What was role of academic advisors into the project?
We had one primary advisor, Matt Ulinski, a professor in
engineering, who devoted the most time to the project.
We had other advisors who were helpful, but it was difficult for many of them to dedicate large amounts of
time. Our advisors helped us to navigate complex university regulations, answer questions, offer expertise,
meet professionals. I met with Matt Ulinski and Zellman
Warhaft regularly to discuss ideas, challenges, ask questions, and keep them informed about developments.
Good academic advisors –preferably in all project areas
(business, engineering, architecture, communications,
technology, etc.) –are a tremendous asset to any SD
project.
9) Can you give us information about the distribution of the
task?
We divided tasks up by sub-teams. Student team leaders or sub-team leaders would oversee each of the subteams. We tried to create sub-teams according to specific assemblies within the house or requirements from
the competition. In leadership we had: a project manager, business leader, communications leader, landscape architecture leader, architecture leader, engineering leader, construction manager. For sub-teams we
had: fundraising, materials procurement, budget, house
sale, media, planning, outreach, website, solar thermal,
HVAC, electric, plumbing, energy modeling, controls,
22
interiors, lighting, landscape architecture, constructions, logistics.
10) Did you do opportunity cost analysis? If you did,
what criteria did you based on ?
Opportunity cost analysis in an economic sense? I’m
not quite sure of this question. We did informally
have to make some decisions about balancing the
house we wanted versus the house we could afford.
We also had to value engineer certain ele ments out
of the design that proved to be too costly.
11) What is the most important feature that distinguishes your home?
We concentrated on a unique design above all else,
however we were severely penalized by the judges
for this gamble. They did not like our house design
and we scored low in this area. To win the competition it is important to concentrate on overall house
performance, efficiency, and solar electric generation. We wanted to do well in all areas, but solar
electric generation in particular was a significant
weakness for our design.
12) How did you deliver the house to United States?
(For teams in Europe and Asia)
We were able to ship the house in three pieces on
three flatbed trucks. For international teams this is
much more difficult and adds considerable expense
because the houses must be delivered to the United
States by boat, then moved to a truck and delivered.
This also decreases build time. I know we were able
to continue building our house while team Germany
had their house packaged on a boat.
13) How did you take this project together with University classes?
This was also very difficult. For those most invested
in the project, including myself, we focused on the
Solar Decathlon project foremost and concentrated