"Green" homes in suburbs? (St. Charles, Sugar Grove: rent, new home, buy)

[ccjarider]

If one wants to build/purchase a product such as this "green" stuff for whatever personal reason, (i.e. - lower cost to maintain, feeling good because you are "helping: the environment, whatever other reason you can conceive, etc.); they should be entititled to.

If there is enough demand, the free market will see to it that demand is satisfied.

What pisses others and me off is the arguement within the enviro-nazi movement is that everyone should be forced adopt this old hippie lifestyle.

If it works for you, go for it. It may not work for others so stop trying to push it down our throats.

[DCB80]

ccjarider said : "What pisses others and me off is the arguement within the enviro-nazi movement is that everyone should be forced adopt this old hippie lifestyle."

What pisses me off is the fact that there are still many people out there who are misguided enough to dismiss any assertion that we (humans) are quickly fouling the planet. Is it so hard to believe that Governments, Industry, and the everyday Joe's (like me) can't be relied upon to police ourselves for our own best long term interest? History has proven that we are irresponsible and generally want to ignore the big picture if it interferes with getting what we want NOW.

chet everett said : "I know that there are firms in the region that will do all the fancy closed cell foam insulation (just like on This Old House), and you can go through the hassle of getting other non-standard materials, but at the end of day you may very well have spend MORE and not really done anything "better". If your super insulated building requires constant ventilation, even with heat recovery air exchangers and such, does not all the added power to run those systems PLUS the added materials to build those system PLUS the added the labor to install them contribute to large initial carbon footprint?"

I happen to be one of those who installs that "fancy" foam insulation. Fact is all buildings need ventilation in order to eliminate stale air, material offgassing from carpets and wood finishes etc. , to that fish you fried in a pan the other night. If your building didn't vent, you would still be smelling that fish today. Most single family homes have so much air leakage that it serves as a default venting system.
If your neighbors house happens to be exactly like yours, but is insulated with foam insulation, they would not only be more comfortable but they would save about 40% on their energy usage throughout the year. Do the math and you'll see that any extra controlled ventilation and/or heat recovery system would pay for itself in 3-4 months with the energy savings gained. The cost of the foam insulation will be returned on average in 3 years time. Doesn't sound too expensive or even "hippie" to me. Sounds practical.

As far as LEED goes, my opinion is mixed. I think that the exposure LEED generates is good for the industry. The more conscious the general public is about energy efficiency, Global warming etc. the higher the demand for more of these products the quicker prices drop for all these materials. This is more than a trend, it is happening by necessity. Get with it or get run over by reality.
My problem with LEED is that they are great at marketing but their point system to actually rate the building is goofy. If you can get a LEED rating on a building by adding a few extra bike racks out front to cut the carbon footprint there's something wrong. Green Globes is a more practical solution than LEED but they don't have the PR or the industry acceptance. This is a VHS vs Beta scenario all over again and Beta will lose again, sadly.

[cohdane]

Originally Posted by ccjarider

If one wants to build/purchase a product such as this "green" stuff for whatever personal reason, (i.e. - lower cost to maintain, feeling good because you are "helping: the environment, whatever other reason you can conceive, etc.); they should be entititled to.

If there is enough demand, the free market will see to it that demand is satisfied.

What pisses others and me off is the arguement within the enviro-nazi movement is that everyone should be forced adopt this old hippie lifestyle.

If it works for you, go for it. It may not work for others so stop trying to push it down our throats.

1. Not trying to push it down anyone's throats. Just would like it to be an option for me, as a buyer, which it isn't unless I want to build from scratch.

Why?

Because....

2. The free market isn't as efficient as you think it is. You have only to look at the miles and miles of vacant, half-finished, foreclosing and declining value McMansion mushroom farms to see evidence of that.

Builders make more money on cheaper construction-- "green" and energy efficient ain't cheap.

Builders make more the more house they put on the lot. Hence, monster houses that are energy hogs with "soaring foyers" and lots of wasted open space.

Cities get more tax revenue off big fancy houses than modest, energy efficient ones.

So there is/has been a lot more market incentive to build glitzy than build green. With disastrous results.

The free market's problem is that it only is motivated by individual short-term profit and not long term stability and results. In the end-- like what's happening now-- everyone loses.

[ccjarider]

cohdane:
I can tell from your posts that this is a topic if interest to you and I respect that it is a good hoice for you. It may or may not be for me.

Your view of the free market is incorrect though. Builders and cities do not control the type of product offered, (i.e. big home, efficient home, dome home, 3 sided shack, whatever.)

Nothing could be further trom the truth. The market decides what type of homes will be built. By that I mean the buyers of the product decides. If more people desired a small, bio frendly building then someone would figure out a way to make $ by providing it.

Builders do not force product down anyone's throat and cities will get the same amount of tax dollars regardless of the # of big homes or small homes.

The fact that you cannot easily find what you want, means that you are in a minority and your product preference is not desired by the masses. Product preference may change and whoever can figure out what people want best, will provide the product and make $ doing so.

This is the beauty of the free market.

[ccjarider]

DCB80,

So what are you saying - I must buy my insulation from guys like you??
Maybe I would, I kinda like reducing my expenses and if I can see a postive payback, it may make sense.

However it is my choice to do or not do so. It is not the role of gov't or do gooder moevements to dicate.

[DCB80]

ccjarider,

We live in the USA. No one is forcing you to buy into this technology. The fact is that foam insulation has a bout a 7-10% share of the market right now. Fiberglass is most of the rest. Most people will stick with fiberglass as long as it is so cheap, but already many large commercial buildings are being called obsolete because of their high energy usage, even though they may be only 5 years old. This will effect the residential market too. In the end it affects your resale ability which will hurt your wallet. In the 70's a lot of people didn't think they would need a computer, it was expensive and complicated, now look at us! Gov't didn't force you to buy your PC, you did it out of necessity I assume. Gas of all kinds will only become more expensive. Go ahead, Drill Baby Drill, till there's nothing left that you can afford, then you'll wish you made a different choice.

By the way, why is watching out for the environment and the people in it looked on as Hippie, Liberal, Socialist etc? Historically "do gooders" have very little sway in Gov't, nowhwere near the influence Big Business, Big Industry and the Energy Corps have.

Sometimes "do gooders " actually do some good though.

[Lookout Kid]

The "free market" argument is B.S. when it comes to urban planning and development. Government is so deeply involved in development and planning issues that most people don't even notice it anymore. 90% of how a neighborhood is developed is due to government interference in the form of transportation systems, zoning codes, building codes, lending restrictions, etc. The "free market" works quite well if you're selling imaginary "widgets", but functions poorly in the world of real estate development and urban planning.

[ccjarider]

Bureaucrats can plan it but nobody has a gun to their head to buy. it. Sorry truth is truth.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by ccjarider

Bureaucrats can plan it but nobody has a gun to their head to buy. it. Sorry truth is truth.

Well, energy codes are a real thing even today (Did you really think that furnace you bought didn't have any regulations attached to it?). The same can be said for the hundreds of other codes and regualtions that went into the DNA of a single simple suburban home. "Green building" just represents another level of regulation. For now, much of it is voluntary. It won't be in 20 years. We won't even think of it as "green building" anymore, it will just be how things are done.

[ccjarider]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

Well, energy codes are a real thing even today (Did you really think that furnace you bought didn't have any regulations attached to it?). The same can be said for the hundreds of other codes and regualtions that went into the DNA of a single simple suburban home. "Green building" just represents another level of regulation. For now, much of it is voluntary. It won't be in 20 years. We won't even think of it as "green building" anymore, it will just be how things are done.

Totally agree with you. This issue (right or wrong) will just become part of the fabric of home building.