Unacceptable Inefficiency, Even in New Homes

[SiliconJon]

Are the new homes going up in or around your neighborhood effecient? Ours are not. Why not? Why, it's too expensive...contractors have to maintain a steady 75% margin to retire in 8 years

Do you realise how small the extra cost would be to make homes as effecient as economically possible? Pennies, all of which could be easily tacked on the sale price in today's property bubble, at least in this area.

But those few extra nails in the drywall are too time-consuming, and that extra insulation is too expensive.

And there's so much more, but that's just something that could be easily and cheaply forced upon as a new building code all across the country. That alone would improve every new home's energy efficiency greatly. Actual number? Maybe 30% improvement over environmental control costs if I were to provide an unqualified estimate. No matter what the actual number, it would pay for itself in 1-2 years straight off the home-owners power bills.

And there are more options, though not as easy or as cost effective, but still would result in money saved over a reasonable amount of time and massive energy savings if applied nationally. Such as windows, furnaces, AC, as well as a need to eventually completely redesign our internal structures for accomodating more effecient energy release from our appliances. Such as seasonal modes on things such as dryers, ovens, and refrigerators. They need to release the heat outside in the summer, and inside in the winter. It's really not that big a deal to implement, but you know how much you save when you pench pennies by the millions...despite knowing full well a truly better product can find it's place on the market and should be fully capable of taking the inferior products off the shelves. But that would require more work and less golf.



http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bldg/fyh/ratings/

Energy Saving Tips

[SiliconJon]

Here's a great example: Geothermal environmental conditioning. Even when used as a supplement to a super-efficient AC & Heater, it cuts energy consumption dramatically. These items have been known as vastly superior environmental control systems since 1993.

On average, a geothermal heat pump system costs about $2,500 per ton of capacity, or roughly $7,500 for a 3-ton unit (typical residential size). In comparison, other systems would cost about $4,000 with air conditioning. When included in the mortgage, the homeowner has a positive cash flow from the beginning. For example, say that the extra $3,500 will add $30 per month to each mortgage payment. But the energy cost savings will easily exceed that added mortgage amount over the course of each year. On a retrofit, the GHP's high efficiency typically means much lower utility bills, allowing the investment to be recouped in two to ten years.

Ten years being absolute worst case, hired a drunken overpriced monkey to do the work when my power bill would have otherwise been subsidized by Monster Electric's deal with Uncle Sam.

[RADAR1797]

Yeah building is silly these days. Whenever I am able to plant roots (years away), my wife and I will have a home built. It will be preferably built on land where I have water rights for a well. I will install solar panels on the roof and use satellite for TV. I will have a generator or fuel cell for power and if I can tie into the power grid, will sell excess production to the power company. I will have a natural gas tank. If the grid fails, I will not be concerned because my phone will be cellular and I can get back up internet access through the cell phone.
Bottom line, my home will be as unreliant on the grid as possible. I will still be hooked into the power grid to sell back excess electricity I produce. I wish more people would choose this practice as it would significantly reduce our energy dependence. Alas, I would never mandate it.

[SiliconJon]

Super-Efficient Windows have been around for a while.

Comparison of the combined condenser and AHU power for the 17-day period showed that the improved home used 14.7% less cooling energy than the standard home.

14.7% just from the windows! Do you know how much that is over ten years, multiplied by millions...well, yeah, still 14.7% on avg perhaps...but total energy consumption wise! Krikey.

During the 24-hour period, although both houses were heating, the improved house's heat pump consumed 36.4% less energy. This is made more impressive by the fact that the interior temperature in the improved house was also higher.

There is absolutely no reason for building codes to [NOT] be modified to require such effeciencies in new homes. Oh, but there is...that could result in "outdated" property dropping in value, or at least not earning as much ROI. A lot of law-making power behind that money.

[SiliconJon]

Efficient, eh! Not everybody's doing it, but many more should.

[laylow]

that extra insulation is too expensive

It is not so much that the extra insulation is expensive but with standard building practices, fitting the required insulation can be problematic. I no longer build cape style houses because trying to get R-49 insulation (12+ inches) into the roof area of a standardly framed cape and maintain proper ventilation is not doable without resorting to large amount of foam insulation on the interior surfaces. I do not use foam if i can avoid it

Bottom line, my home will be as unreliant on the grid as possible. I will still be hooked into the power grid to sell back excess electricity I produce. I wish more people would choose this practice as it would significantly reduce our energy dependence. Alas, I would never mandate it.

I read recently that the new energy bill wiil require all public utilities to offer interconnection to the power grid and net metering upon request. I believe that currently net metering is available to some extent in 36 states. The new bill makes it available in all states.

Also on the link to the Canadian builder, he is using very poorly thought out building techniques which will cause problems IMO.

[MTAtech]

When I bought my house 13 years ago, it used 1,500 gal. of oil per year and was drafty.

The first thing I did was add another layer of insulation (R-25) to the attic's existing R-13 insulation. Then, everytime I remodeled a room I replaced the existing insulation with 3-1/2" R-15, then put a layer of Celotex Thermax on top of the joists and then the sheetrock on top of that (using 2-1/2" screws.) This makes the wall about R-20 while only making the wall an inch thicker. While the walls were down, I also use expanding foam around the windows.

Now we only use 650 gal. of oil per year and the house is also quieter.

I also installed photovoltaic solar panels on the roof that make about 20% of my electricity.

If one's building a new home consider a design that takes advantage of passive heating.

[Micky758]

I moving pretty soon and I'm thinking about installing a micro-wind turbine - but they are quite expensive, even with government grants.

[SiliconJon]

Nice, isn't it MTATech. That's a 56% reduction in oil usage. Amazing, isn't it. Quite a bit of work you did, also. But paid for itself easily.

My older sister has been putting off insulating her attic for over two years now. I told her it would pay for itself in just one winter, but she still puts it off. She doesn't have a lick of insulation in her rafters, and the climate around here is not at all friendly to that.

What's up with the foam, laylow. Messy? Toxic? Fire-Hazardous?

The Insulation Handbook

[MTAtech]

Silicon, I did the work over time. By far, the biggest difference was the attic and it was the easiest project - just roll the stuff out.

The government could do much too. My suggestions are tax credits for insulation; retail sales for insulation not subject to sales tax; credits for solar, wind, etc.

[SiliconJon]

Yes, very good idea. Maybe even something like a program, say in cooperation with the energy company. If someone's bill is so high, find out their square footage and provide them with information on how to get it reduced. And pay for it on top of your new power bill, say keeping the bill to about what it was before until the improvements or materials have been paid for. Once paid for, you would from then on see exactly how much you're saving. Since the power companies would never go for this one their own, it would have to be pushed by the government.

But don't forget to top it off with a mass wave of education. It seems far too many don't know or don't know enough to care (as they only know what it would cost up front...and not what it would save them in a short run).

[laylow]

What's up with the foam, laylow. Messy? Toxic? Fire-Hazardous?

I prefer to screw drywall directly to the wood framing without going through 2-3 inches of foam.
I have no problem using foam around the exterior of a masonry foundation, but I plan my houses to use fiberglass insulation everywhere else.

[MTAtech]

One can put the foam board on the outside, under the siding.

[pphalan]

If you guys knew how much the contractors make when they bid on these housing tracks you would be shocked. The only way to get a house built to high standards is to buy the land and act as your own general contractor, hire a guy with a good rep to oversee the subs. You can come up with alot better home at a cheaper price.

[laylow]

One can put the foam board on the outside, under the siding.

You have to keep in mind when designing that the outside skin of a house should be more permeable than the interior skin.
Since foam is a vapor barrier, consideration must be given to what method will be used to let the water vapor permeate the exterior when foam is placed on the exterior of a house.

[laylow]

The only way to get a house built to high standards is to buy the land and act as your own general contractor, hire a guy with a good rep to oversee the subs. You can come up with alot better home at a cheaper price.

Hey, I resent that
There are still those of us around who build high quality spec houses.

[pphalan]

Fine then you are the type of guy that should be hired I was talking about. But in the 1500 to 2000 sq foot homes around my place I would not take the guys to a worm wrestle......drive by them and see the ripples in the siding cause these guys nail the panels tight. Piss poor electrical work at bare minimum, no thought to the work just lay it out exactly at minimum to pass inspection....you end up with plugs behind doors when a little thought would back them off where they would be useful. Smokedetectors on heavily used lines. Take a guess with what was wrong with one that was tied to a line that ran 3 bedrooms recepticals and all upstairs lights......the home run line was burning up because they used a push in on the back off the switch to feed everything else on the line. The lady told me she smelled burning occasionally everytime she went by her daughters bedroom, the smokedetectors would not have gone off they were taken out of action by lousy work, just a couple points. It would take me a week to go through the trash work I've seen on sites over the last 5 years.

[SiliconJon]

I've heard of the same "quality" work being performed locally. It's the standard. A friend who poors concrete tells me many of the new houses going up have pass-only foundations, not at all going to last the lifetime of the house. It's dispicable that such an important commodity is so lazily thrown about.

As for figures I've seen & heard locally, some contractors are making about $80K clear each on 200K houses. Granted many are turning around and spending 90% on business upgrades (that there equipment be espinsive). They are also developers, as they do the job from buying the land, subdividing, building, and selling. Still a heck of a year if you get 36 houses done in one season. That's nearly 3 million gross profit. And how much would it take to build them sturdy and efficient? Take that 2.88Mil down to no lower than 2.5...Unacceptable, eh. 380K lost for the sake of the people and environment, no sale. And that's a very high estimate.

http://healthandenergy.com/energy_efficient_homes.htm