Looking to future, what to build NOW?
Seems like this is a good topic to revisit, what with fuel prices going up and no relief in sight.
What’s the upper-middle income family home of the future? How large? How many stories? Built with what materials?
It’s clear that insulation is going to be very significant to anyone buying a new home. How do you plan to deal with that question?
What’s the best kind of insulated glass available? The most efficient heat source?
I’ve gained a great deal of product knowledge while reading BT over the last year and a half. And I’ve gone through several serious inquiries into their use and cost.
ICFs had me pretty excited for several months, as did PAHS underground living. They each have their advantages and a few disadvantages and/or unresolved questions as well.
Being a lifelong carpenter and wanting to work with wood I eventually returned to that material and looked more closely at super insulated engineering. We had a very interesting and thought provoking thread on that topic going for a couple of weeks, late last winter.
So I’d like to know where your mind is at on new home design. Just like the automobile industry, builders have to make some changes in response to rising energy costs. How do you design/engineer a home for the next fifty years?
Replies
If we, as a society are getting any smarter, the house to build would be smaller with as many solar passive heating features as you can get and also easy to keep cool in the summer. Tight with lots of insulation. Unfortunately I am not sure we are that smart yet and there may still be a good McMansion market on the next run up.
I can't remember any details, but not too long ago a caught a little of an NPR radio segment concerning homes built to sustain life in the event of extended periods of energy blackouts. Scary thought and maybe even realistic considering the state of the world.
concerning homes built to sustain life in the event of extended periods of energy blackouts. Scary thought and maybe even realistic considering the state of the world.
Might seem scary but it's not so bad. I lived without electrical power for an entire year in my first small cabin and since then I've often lived without power for a day or two when the ice storms tear down power lines all over the area. I don't like reading by kerosene lantern but it's not terrible.
Electricity helps us to dominate or exclude the environment instead of living in harmony with it. So it has down sides to it as well as it's many obvious benefits.
Short anecdote: One sunny winter morning the power went out for no apparent reason. A few minutes later the phone rang and I answered.
"Hello".
"Peter?", asked a very sweet sounding older woman's voice, one I didn't recognize.
She had my name right so I replied, "Yes".
"You got 'lectric?"
"Nope."
"Well I'll be darned".
Quite curious, I had to ask, "Who's this?"
"Why...it's grandma", she replied, sounding a might hurt that her "grandson" didn't know her voice.
"Well grandma", I said with a light hearted chuckle, "my name is Peter alright but I don't believe I'm the fellow you were calling."
"Oh my goodness", she said, "How embarrassing".
"Not at all. I'm delighted to know that I've got an extra grandma now."
After we concluded the pleasantries and hung up I sat for a moment and considered what a wondeful thing had just happened to me...as a result of the electricity failing. I can still hear that delightful voice and feel it's wonderful emotional content.
So let it all go, if it must. We'll survive and probably thrive. Bicycles and home vegetable gardens. Solar power for essentials like food storage and communications. Small cooperative communities/neighborhoods mean closer relations with other humans. Less dysfunction is one likely outcome.
"Less dysfunction is one likely outcome."After the anarchy and death toll stops. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
After the anarchy and death toll stops.
I'd go into that unlikely scenario with you but this thread would eventually end up in the Tavern. Since I'm not a subscriber to that forum, I'll pass.
You must have some practical ideas on this builder's question. Let's hear 'em.
I say build small and deep if you live in the north. Probably the best situation will be to do like my grandma did....live in her basement. When the situation gets real bad, the owners of the McMansions will have an ample supply of wood to burn as they huddle down in their 2000 sqft basements. They'll be able to subdivide them into four or five residences, and the owner of the house will be able to burn the sticks above them, a few sticks at a time to survive.So, I'd be thinking small, very small if I was planning on a fifty year heating bill. I'd be anticipating a major breakthrough in solar and want a lot that could capture the southern exposure. I'd also want access to water. So, the ideal home for me would be on a lake's north shore, with a small walkout basement. I'd put the obligatory top floor on it but always have it in my mind that I need to keep the sublevel warm. Icfs and a fully insulated floor would be the key with a generous southern exposure. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
After the anarchy and death toll stops
See my thread re buying ammo on line...........
Joe H
"Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices..." Republicans "continue to give the American people empty rhetoric rather than join the Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now." Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. April 19, 2006
Location might be the primary difference! I'm genuinely optimistic that we'll find a renewable solution for private transportation. . . eventually. There might be some decades in which transportation is way too expensive to justify living in the 'burbs.
Aside from that, I think we might see some interesting changes in how we actually heat and cool homes (and heat water!) aside from insulation. As the world transitions away from a fossil fuel economy, the price of any gas or liquid fuel will probably fluctuate, whether it's renewable or not. The supply/demand ratio is probably going to be rocky, with demand destruction ("I can't afford to drive a car so I won't buy one") walking hand in hand with new technologies ("but now I could afford to buy cellosic ethanol").
I wouldn't be surprised if we saw more ground-source heat pumps and perhaps even masonry heaters, for the sole reason that they use energy sources that are of lower economic value. Electrical energy has yet to prove itself for transportation, and flammable solids are unwieldy.
I think houses will be smaller, but maybe not too much smaller. The average Canadian house is 2000 ft^2 right now, which isn't small but isn't sprawling, either.
Edited 7/11/2008 11:01 am ET by Biff_Loman
There might be some decades in which transportation is way too expensive to justify living in the 'burbs.
I was talking with an old friend from my hometown in upstate NY about that the other day. It's a fringe area for commuters to NYC, where many people have moved since 9/11.
From what I gathered, the gas prices have been causing some of the commuters to change their outlook. That outlook is also influenced by the size and type of new home they've been living in, these last few years. That conversation is what sparked this topic.
I say, move south and get out of the climates that require heat. You'll freeze to death without heat but you can sit under a sombrero here in Austin till the sun goes down....then the night life begins.
Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
I think it's a great topic.
Not a builder, but here's what I'd be looking for in my next house, or trying to retrofit to the one I have:
Solar collector for electric and hot water. I'm hopeful that the technology here is going to really move forward in the next few years and make it easier and cheaper to put it to work.
Super insulated walls and roof. I've been rereading the April FHB on insulation. I'm intrigued by the spray foam on the roof underside, and the rigid foam above the sheathing, particularly if the rigid foam has a reflective coating to help keep the roof cool. ICFs, too.
A move toward more underground space. Hurdles to overcome no doubt in terms of light and dryness, but I'm always amazed that more homes don't take advantage of the least fluctuating climate in a house.
Lighting. Well, I'm expecting Forrest to come through with a new LED series that's not too harsh and a lot less than $50/bulb. But we're still dealing with a technology that's 100 years old here. Gotta be room for improvement, right?
HVAC. It seems (seams? LOL) to me that a lot of conditioned air leaks through the joints in the metal trunk lines. How come there's not a PVC version that would help eliminate this? Maybe there is and I'm just not aware of it. But why pay for air to be heated or cooled, just to lose it in between walls or floors? Here again it seems like the systems haven't changed much in 50 years or so.
Rainwater collection system. If for nothing else than watering the plants/lawn and washing cars.
Probably the biggest thing is nearby proximity to work, public transit, and frequent shops. When gas goes to $6/gallon all those homes that are an hour's drive from work aren't going to seem so attractive.
I think it's a great topic.
And the ideas you discussed are all worthy contributions to it.
I'm intrigued by the spray foam on the roof underside, and the rigid foam above the sheathing, particularly if the rigid foam has a reflective coating to help keep the roof cool.
If the purpose of that method is to make the space above the ceiling part of the conditioned air it's probably a very good way to achieve it.
However there's another, much less expensive way to insulate the duct work in that space and gain more R value as well.
Mike Smith's photo thread on a modest custom home he built last year shows how he used almost two feet deep cellulose to achieve both aims at a very reasonable price.
First, I'm probably looking more short term as I tend to think in terms of the homes I'm building right now, next month, or next year....
All: The first thing is that home buyers mindset of bigger is better is going to have to change - for 2 reasons: 1) Obviously, a 1500 sq ft home is going to use significantly less energy than a 3000 sq ft home - construction being equal. 2) every homebuyer has a budget and they have to make conscious decision to accept less home in exchange for better construction. This stuff about build it and buyers will come is just a pipe dream in today's business environment. It's on the buyers. As of right now, 95% of my home buyers choose more space, upgraded cabinets, more wall colors, upgraded appliances, etc, over more insulation or other energy upgrades. I have to give them the house they want - if I want to put food on the table... Sure I can address little details that help a lot, but the big return items, the home buyer has to pay for. Or, it can be done via building codes - which still is paid for by the end user. The good news is that building codes level the playing field among builders.
This extends to the home's lot too - many people want more exterior space. Which equates to more commute time, more time and energy (of both kinds) spent on maintenance, more money spent on taxes, and in general a less efficient way to live.
I'm fighting an ongoing battle right now on these times with someone I love dearly... We here at BT often scoff at these tightly packed in subdivisions, but really, for today's lifestyles, it makes sense. ME? I just want to be able to walk home from a bar where everybody knows my name....
FR: to touch on a few the items in your list:
>> I'm intrigued by the spray foam on the roof underside, and the rigid foam above the sheathing, particularly if the rigid foam has a reflective coating to help keep the roof cool. << Radiant barrier OSB sheathing is available, is no more labor to install and is quite cheap - I recently did a modest sized house for ~$100 extra for the roof. Not sure what the actual returns are... Likely better returns for the south....
>> Lighting. Well, I'm expecting Forrest to come through with a new LED series that's not too harsh and a lot less than $50/bulb. But we're still dealing with a technology that's 100 years old here. Gotta be room for improvement, right? << Pin based florescent are available right here, right now. OTOH, IMO, CFLs are a poor choice.
Just last week I had a meeting with a home buyer where his real estate agent poo-pooed the use of florescent lighting. At that point I said: No, this is what is going in the house... FR: Think they are "harsh"? GET USED TO IT! :-) In that meeting the homebuyer made a commitment to buy better insulation - I was visibly pleased.
>> HVAC. It seems (seams? LOL) to me that a lot of conditioned air leaks through the joints in the metal trunk lines. How come there's not a PVC version that would help eliminate this? Maybe there is and I'm just not aware of it. But why pay for air to be heated or cooled, just to lose it in between walls or floors? Here again it seems like the systems haven't changed much in 50 years or so. << Oh yes they have. Flex duct is now very popular, (technically I guess it is PVC) and in just the last 15 years or so my state's code requirements has gone from R-4 to R-8 for duct insulation. (still seems low to me). Further, duct systems are being better sealed, at least partially because of the Energy Star program. 10 years ago I went to an ES seminar that said that average duct systems had around 15% leakage. Builders are demanding better. (or at least a few are including one I know (-: ). HVAC companies are using duct sealant by the buckets on system installs. In today's normal building environment less than 5% is easily achievable and 2% isn't that much harder. Better still would be if air delivery systems were contained within the conditioned air space. Again though, this is an item that the home buyer must pay for via closed crawl spaces, etc.
So, don't think things aren't changing. IMO, things just aren't changing fast enough...
I may be biased, since all I do is remodeling, but I think that a very likely and effective solution will be to collectively turn our focus away from brand new development 40 miles from center city, and start to really improve existing homes on a large scale. I live in Charlotte, where suburban growth is measured in square miles per day, but there are tens of thousands of great potential existing homes within the city limits. I live about three miles from downtown, and all of my jobs are within 5. I spend very little time in the truck, and we're close to everything. We bought a piece of junk house a few years ago and have been working on turning it into somewhere that we want to be and can afford to be for a long time. Gas prices will never affect us to the point of debilitation that so many suburban families will endure, and we live in a neighborhood with 100+ year old trees and bars within stumbling distance(although I have my own kegerator. Saving bottles!)It is a big upfront cost investment to turn a 1940's bungalow into a super-efficient home, but I believe that a lot American's will start to value city life as I do, as well as the great character of old homes and neighborhoods.I'm expecting my business to change over the years from additions and kitchen remodels, to more nuts and bolts remodeling. It's not as fun, but it is much more responsible and practical, and is something that will drastically reduce this country's need for fossil fuels.
If I were to build, and I'd really like to, but cannot afford to build and don't see that changing in near future (by the time I'd be able to afford to build, it'd be time for me to move into assisted living!), I'd strongly consider ICF's or some other form of concrete. I am tired of all the bugs that live in and eat the wood in my house now. Seems like a constatnt battle to keep wood dry and free of carpenter ants and rot. Fire is often an issue, not so much around here (yet), nor is flood, but to make a durable house that will last through just about anything Mother Nature can throw at it, I'd be building with concrete.
I'd site the house to get lots of solar heat gain in winter and reject solar in summer. I'd probably include a water heater that could be tied into a solar heater in summer and isolated from it in winter. I'd have a cistern for rain water to water plants with and for emergency water. I'd also consider a gray water system for irrigating plants. Would probably at least berm part of the house. Around here, with the possibility of flooding, it'd be hard to decide about building in the earth, or building up out of it. I'd probably choose a high enough site to build into the earth. Several advantages--it is very quiet, can get some benefit from constant heat of earth so it is cooler in summer and warmer in winter. A hobbit house would be lovely, except I am over six feet tall. But hobbit houses have lots of good features and I like rounded things.
I'd probably consider a dome for the outer shell, but have some box-like rooms within it and have a heat retaining core of masonry or even adobe with a Russian stove as part of that. Have wood storage on a terrace and a pass-through to fireplace so wouldn't track wood bark and snow and dirt through house. Have a winter living room near the core and a summer living room on a partially enclosed terrace. Detached garage with breezeway between it and house. Probably have radiant heat in concrete floor.
One other problem is just about everything I would like in a house, my wife hates. I like glass block and pierced concrete and concrete floors. Wife hates all those things. So, looks like I'll be here for a while--at least my mortgage is paid off here!
Thanks for the thoughtful and interesting post.
Thank you. As you can see, I've thought and dreamt about this for quite some time. Back when I was young I was going to buy raw land and build a house myself, starting small and adding on and not having a mortgage. But, have to buy land on land contract, since I don't think banks will loan money on land unless the house and mortgage go with it. But with LC, you don't own the land until the last payment is made, so that would delay the construction. Lastly, I ended up moving about a hundred times since I wanted to do that, so it wouldn't have worked anyway.
Now I have a double lot and a half and have toyed with the idea of building a new and good house on the empty part of the lot while living where I am, then bulldozing the old one (or, more likely, selling the old house--but then the "neighbors" would be awfully close, unless I used the old house as a "grandma flat").
Working with a knowledgeable real estate agent, I bought my first 4.4acre lot in my mid-twenties, with a private mortgage held by the seller. The land was deeded to me immediately, the mortgage protecting the rights of the seller.
It was a win-win deal, them getting the property and it's basic liabilities off their hands and me finding myself with a great piece of rural land where I could build a cabin and live according to my means.
Such deals are often possible, when everyone's interests are served.
I always have a next house in mind for myself and my DW. With the capital gains exclusion on the sale of one's primary residence offering me a means to earn a good living, I'm able to build what suits us and the market while enjoying the process at my own pace.
Edited 7/12/2008 7:55 pm by Hudson Valley Carpenter
About twenty years ago, I visited a family who lived off the grid. Because they didn't have the money up front for a large system, they had to make adjustments to their lifestyle most families wouldn't make-like only running the vacuum when the wind generator was putting out enough watts etc.
Since then, the local utility company charges higher min.'s and there are more taxes. They are a real pain to deal with sometimes.
I'm very hopeful the latest spike in prices will encourage more research that will make it easier and cheaper to tell the util. co. to shove it.
If that happens, I wonder if roofs will change in pitch and style to incorporate solar panels and if lots and codes will change to allow wind generation etc.
Will room layout change to deal with batteries and equipment?
Will it change the size of houses? You can have a house X sq ft and have an energy bill or have a smaller house with more money into energy production.
I'm very hopeful the latest spike in prices will encourage more research....
Amen to that!
IMHO... details matter.... paying attention to many small things will pay off....
using all the small stuff we all already know... sealing everything so there are no leaks... is alot easier than chase'n em down.... build smaller ... yes.... but you don't have to be cramped to save...
alot of planning will keep you warm and cool...
everyone knows high r-values... are a good thing... mass for storing heat ... solar is already an easy deal for heating needs... just have to plan for it and it's not that much of an added cost...
I love the idea of living off the grid... always wondered about living in arkansas somewhere where you had a hot spring on your own land....
there are many places where you can have your own natural gas wells where people heat, cook and generate elect with the natural gas from their own wells... with that and a natural all year spring... you'd be set...
p