|
Posted by tg on November 6, 2009, 3:09 pm
> > > > > "The Actual Costs of Owning a Home are the MONTHLY COSTS, NOT the
> > > > > Purchase Price
> > > > > Actual Costs =3D Monthly Costs + Hidden Costs
> > > > > It is a misconception that the more we reduce a building's
> > > > > environmental footprint, the more money we have to spend. While i=
t is
> > > > > true that many "greener" options will require more hard earned
> > > > > dollars, the best options will actually save you money from the v=
ery
> > > > > first month.
> > > > > Payback is one way of looking at an energy investment. For exampl=
e: if
> > > > > one spends 30k dollars on a PV solar system, how many months or y=
ears
> > > > > will it take to make that money back in lower, monthly energy bil=
ls?
> > > > > There are some serious flaws to using a payback approach:
> > > > > 1. Most people finance, which changes the initial purchase price =
into
> > > > > monthly, mortgage payments.
> > > > > 2. Monthly, energy bills are always rising and increasingly unsta=
ble
> > > > > making future calculations only a guess.
> > > > > 3. Payback does not account for the millions of hidden costs
> > > > > associated with nuclear and fossil fuel use and dependency.
> > > > > Purchase Price versus Monthly payments
> > > > > People buying a home do not really pay the purchase price. Mortga=
ge
> > > > > payments + energy/utility payments are the actual costs one pays =
to
> > > > > live in a home. The best investments add only a few dollars to yo=
ur
> > > > > mortgage payment, but will bring your energy bills down by double=
or
> > > > > triple that amount, saving money from the first month of occupanc=
y.
> > > > > Forget the earth, invest in yourself.
> > > > > The best investment in our climate is always an air-tight,
> > > > > continuously-insulated envelope. Secondly, heating/cooling system=
s
> > > > > since they represent the largest portion of =A0monthly, energy co=
sts.
> > > > > Money spent in these two areas can increase monthly-mortgage paym=
ents
> > > > > slightly, but will dramatically reduce monthly-energy bills.
> > > > > Financing offers you the ability to own a home. It also offers an
> > > > > opportunity to save alot by spending a little.
> > > > > The right building envelope and space conditioning investments
> > > > > outperform almost any other investments and dramatically reduces
> > > > > environmental impact (if you're into that kinda thing).
> > > > > Mortgage + Monthly Energy Bills =3DActual Cost of Home
> > > > > example:
> > > > > Conventionally built green home
> > > > > $750 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 + =A0 =A0 $100 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =3D =A0 $850
> > > > > Passive Solar, SIP built Green home
> > > > > $756 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 + =A0 =A0 $42 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =3D
> > > > > $798
> > > > > This home would have a higher purchase price and mortgage payment=
, but
> > > > > from the first month of occupancy it would be more affordable. It
> > > > > would also be more comfortable, better protected from rising ener=
gy
> > > > > costs, safe in a winter power outage, and would enjoy a probable,
> > > > > higher re-sale value with less days on the market. =A0It would al=
so be
> > > > > half of the environmental foot-print of the other "green" home."
> > > > Ta, people have simply been brainwashed into this payback nonsense.
> > > > When someone puts a weird ugly turret on a McMansion, what is the
> > > > 'payback'? =A0Why are features having to do with energy consumption
> > > > subject to this analysis when others aren't? =A0Why do people renov=
ate
> > > > kitchens and baths when the fact that they will never recoup their
> > > > investment has been well established for decades?
> > > I agree with you that cost/benefit should not be the sole
> > > consideration for "building green". But even if you narrowly define
> > > "cost" in terms of constructions costs, it *still* works out in your
> > > favor, even in the short term (depending of course on how "green" you
> > > really go).
> > I'm not so sure, from my research into building.
> So you're not buying the math provided by the builder above?
It's that pesky quantitative thinking reflex ;-)
I would say that for an identical house, less than 1 percent
difference in construction cost is suspicious----and then more than
twice the energy use is even more suspicious.
I think what I say below applies---the houses aren't really the same,
and there's a lot of hand-waving going on.
> > I think you have to
> > be careful (as with the health care business) not to allow the
> > discussion to be framed by the opposition, and that's partially what's
> > going on here. =A0It is all a shell game, and you have to realize how
> > vulnerable people are to that.
> > The choice isn't presented as having insulation or not having
> > insulation; it is presented as a place with those ugly turrets v a
> > place without them, for the same price. People will always pick the
> > ugly turrets, because they think that will impress people. So the cost
> > benefit for them is not the same as it is for us. =A0Face it, with all
> > the talk about efficient cars, the buzz is still all about cupholders
> > and 'styling'.
> > This is a very tough problem, and I don't think it gets solved without
> > Gummint Socialist building standards. That way there's a level playing
> > field.
> > -tg
> NC has implemented some "healthy built home" standards, which helps
> set the bar at least minimally low.
I know, we've discussed this at length in the past. I would write
really tough standards.
-tg
> http://healthybuilthomes.org/
> > > > As the article points out, a well built well insulated house will b=
e
> > > > more comfortable to live in and have a better resale value than one
> > > > that isn't, and that's no matter what happens to the climate or oil
> > > > prices or anything else. Duh.
> > > > -tg
> > > > >http://www.springtimehomes.com/green_building_costs
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> > > > > Purchase Price
> > > > > Actual Costs =3D Monthly Costs + Hidden Costs
> > > > > It is a misconception that the more we reduce a building's
> > > > > environmental footprint, the more money we have to spend. While i=